A self/body problem

[JedTheRed]

LU is focused guiding for seeing there is no real, inherent 'self' - what do you understand by this? I have been reading Jed McKenna and I'm currently reading the Gateless Gatecrashers so on one level (and perhaps one level only) I can understand the concept of no self, i.e when I look for a looker/doer there isn't anything there but I have yet to TRULY experience that. My hope is that LU can help me with that as they have others.

What are you looking for at LU? I want to get past this feeling of being blocked, perhaps by a lack of understanding, perhaps it's a sense of over-analysing - I understand (I think) intellectually that I don't exist, that my life is essentially threads upon threads of concepts from the name I was given the day I was born to the particulars and nuances in the job I do. All of it is fictions upon fictions. However, I can't shake this inherent "me-ness" feeling that I am something, and I feel that this feeling comes from seeing from the perspective of a body. In my experience, I am a person, a person from which consciousness appears to be rendered. I believe that the universe I exist in is perceived entirely in my brain which is where this sense of I or me lives also. My thoughts guide my preferences which are different to the preferences of the next person which makes it hard for me to accept non-duality even though on paper it makes sense to me, I just can't see it due to the anchor of a body, a brain and so on.

What do you expect from a guided conversation? I would expect an experienced non-dualist to take apart my beliefs and I hope that the process of doing so will help me see things for what they are. I am a person who would tend to get nervous before social interactions, particularly public speaking, due to the fear of how I am perceived, and I feel that non-dualism, fully realised, would be a path to liberation from this and many other modes of suffering associated with my ego attachment.

What is your experience in terms of spiritual practices, seeking and inquiry? I was a user of Sam Harris' Waking Up app (still subscribed but rarely mediate with it). I have read Jed McKenna's Enlightenment trilogy. Currently reading Gateless Gatecrashers, and I enjoy content from Osho, Sadhguru, and others.

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

[Vivien]

Hi,

Welcome to Liberation Unleashed. My name is Vivien and I can assist you with your inquiry.

This is going to be your inquiry. I will not be giving you new ideas and beliefs; only assisting you in examining and questioning the ones that you already have. We can have a conversation and see where it takes you.

The purpose of which would be for there to be a realization, more than just intellectually, that there never was and never will be a separate self, as, such. All our efforts will focus on that.

I will tend to ask many questions. That's my job here. These, will be pointers towards investigating that what it is that you mistake for a self. It will be for you to examine your experience to find out what's true or not.

I would like to ask you to write only from your experience as you see it, what feels true, with whole honesty.
Also, post daily, or at least every other day. If you cannot post, or need more time, please let me know.
Can we agree on these?

I believe that the universe I exist in is perceived entirely in my brain which is where this sense of I or me lives also.

All right, so this is what you believe. What we do with these investigation is to test our beliefs (conceptual ideas) against our experience (actuality).

So how do you know that this is not just a conceptual stuff, but an actual, real thing?

Vivien

[JedTheRed]

Hey Vivien!

Thank you so much for helping me out with this, I really appreciate it and the work all of you folks are doing here!

I would like to ask you to write only from your experience as you see it, what feels true, with whole honesty.
Also, post daily, or at least every other day. If you cannot post, or need more time, please let me know.
Can we agree on these?

Absolutely. I have been obsessively checking here every day and reading up on other people's posts, so I'm certainly committed to daily posting to get past this mental block. I'll approach this with complete honesty.

I believe that the universe I exist in is perceived entirely in my brain which is where this sense of I or me lives also.

All right, so this is what you believe. What we do with these investigation is to test our beliefs (conceptual ideas) against our experience (actuality).

So how do you know that this is not just a conceptual stuff, but an actual, real thing

I guess this is time for complete honesty - intellectually speaking I feel like it can only be that way, that I can't verify anything else first hand. I find that hard to accept when it certainly seems like something outside of my field of vision still exists when I turn around and look at it. Perhaps this is a rabbit hole which is irrelevant to this process - it's the "I" part of that belief which is the main issue, right?

Forgive me for my confusion on this because I have competing ideas in my mind that fight on a daily basis:
I've been working hard recently to dislodge that feeling of "I" in the middle of my head. In regards to your question about it being a real thing, it feels like a real thing when it snaps back into place after I question "why should awareness originate from a body at all?" It sure seems like this body is at the centre of everything I experience, so it makes sense to me that this is me. On the other hand, I have been given a name at birth, accepted the name of the country I was born in, accepted the label of a country etc etc - it's this framing and story put around things which makes things muddier. Would I have that sense of "I" or "me" if I didn't have any of those things?

Sorry, I've got a busy mind around this stuff and lots of things I want to put on the table - I have recently started to notice things that just "happen". I'm not efforting things like breathing, I catch myself not doing driving but driving happening, and I am starting to see thoughts in a similar way - something which I couldn't ever grasp with meditation but I'm now starting to notice it. I'm not sure if that line of enquiry is a good place to tackle this "I" originating from the body which is seemingly the centre of the universe...

[Vivien]

Hi,

Thank you for your replies.

What name would you like me to call you?

it's the "I" part of that belief which is the main issue, right?

Exactly. The I as a separate person (put your name here) is just a belief, just an illusion, not a real, actual entity.

I've been working hard recently to dislodge that feeling of "I" in the middle of my head.

Just notice, by trying to dislodge the feeling of I in the head, you’ve already accepted the belief that whatever is felt in the middle of the head is I! Do you see that? This is what a belief is. A thought that is taken for granted, an idea that is never ever investigated, because it’s been mistaken for something real… without actually knowing whether it is real or not.

So, let’s stop to try to dislodge that something…. Rather my suggestion would be to approach it as if you were a scientist, who’s just discovered a very interesting phenomenon, and would like to know everything about it.

So we are going to put this sense of I under the microscope to really look at it.

So don’t try to make it go away… rather just FEEL it.
And while you are feeling it… investigate:

How do you know that what is felt is an I, and not something else?
What is the experiential proof? What is the evidence?

On the other hand, I have been given a name at birth, accepted the name of the country I was born in, accepted the label of a country etc etc -

Well, here is another belief taken for granted…. That is that the body is I. Body = I.

Yes, the body was given a name, the body was born in a certain country… but being the body the I, the person, a thinker, doer, decider, chooser, feeler, experiencer… well that is questionable.

Investigate this:
What is your experience of actual? And how do you know what is conceptual?

This is an essential thing to start with. Since the whole illusion is created by mistaking what is conceptual for actual.


Note:
I'm going to write all my questions in blue. Every blue question will be a pointer for you where to look. Please make sure that you investigate ALL the questions thoroughly in your own experience, without trying to come up with an answer from intellectual understanding, like something you've heard or read, or learned by someone else. This is something you need to see, not just understand.

So please make sure that you deeply investigate all blue questions, and you reply to them one-by-one (unless I group them into blocks).

Try to avoid replying quickly... since that would be just the mind answering with the same old beliefs or learned knowledge. Rather with each post, spend a whole day investigating it again and again, before replying. I hope you are OK with this. This deep investigation could help immensely.

Vivien

[JedTheRed]

Thank you for your response Vivien. Your questions have given me plenty to work through. I’m going to take your advice and sit with the blue questions for another day to make sure I can answer them for sure. I’m tempted to launch straight into my reflexive answers but you’re right, I could just be repeating things I’ve read/know intellectually rather than answering directly from felt experience.

I can answer this one in the meantime though!

What name would you like me to call you?

My name is Jordan, and I’m truly thankful you’re taking the time to help me work through this.

Speak to you tomorrow!

[Vivien]

Thank you Jordan :)

[JedTheRed]

Hey Vivien,

Ok, I’ve sat with the questions for a while and I’m glad I did because I stepped out of my reflexive answers into my felt answers:

How do you know that what is felt is an I, and not something else?
What is the experiential proof? What is the evidence?

I have no evidence for it, even saying this aloud makes me laugh a little. There have been times where I’ve been down a line of self-inquiry that leads to laughter but old ego habits fall back into place. I don’t know it’s an I as such, but I guess that’s perhaps the frame I have put on it in a similar way that I can put a boundary around the feeling of anxiety. Yet “I” has no physical sensations… so I guess I’m very short on experiential proof!

There is a sense of “I am” because I perceive the world through my senses which brings about an ownership feeling, eg “this is my experience”, and that cloud of “I” - a collection of sensations, emotions, thoughts appear to belong there, or behind the face of the person staring back at me in the mirror. Sorry if this doesn’t make any sense, I’m finding it hard to describe it (perhaps because it’s not there!)

What is your experience of actual? And how do you know what is conceptual?

It feels like I can reach out and touch the table in front of me which makes me believe there is a table there. There is the smell of cooking which tells me if I follow it to the kitchen, there will be cooking there, but I understand that on some level these are interpretations in the brain and, technically speaking, I have no experience of the actual other than the fact that there is something here to experience anything at all.

Perhaps I’m confusing awareness itself with “I”?

[Vivien]

Hi Jordan,


You did a nice investigation :)

a collection of sensations, emotions, thoughts appear to belong there, or behind the face of the person staring back at me in the mirror.

Now search through the whole head for an I. Look, if there is actually someone there owning the sense perceptions?

Is there someone behind the eyes looking out the eyes, like through two windows?

Is there an actual I inside the head hearing with the ears?

Is there someone in the forehead thinking thoughts?

Remember, we are looking for an experiential evidence.

There have been times where I’ve been down a line of self-inquiry that leads to laughter but old ego habits fall back into place

Yes, because it is not enough to see it once, or twice or even ten times. This needs to be seen repeatedly, hundreds of times to really sink in. Repetition is essential.

It feels like I can reach out and touch the table in front of me which makes me believe there is a table there. There is the smell of cooking which tells me if I follow it to the kitchen, there will be cooking there, but I understand that on some level these are interpretations in the brain and, technically speaking, I have no experience of the actual other than the fact that there is something here to experience anything at all.

OK, let’s look at this more deeply.

Can we say that the colors/shapes that are seen are actual?
And the smell? When a smell is there, it’s actual, isn’t it?

Also tastes, sensations, sounds…. These are all actual experiences, happening right now

Notice, you don’t need thoughts or interpretation to know the presence of a sensation, or a sound, or a smell, right?

Do you need thoughts to see whatever is labelled as ‘table’? To see t that cluster of colours and shapes?

And what is conceptual? How do you know if something is conceptual?

Perhaps I’m confusing awareness itself with “I”?

Well, the word awareness is heavily loaded nowadays. Also the word consciousness. Most people unconsciously personalize awareness, not seeing how impersonal it is. There is not a shred of personal to it. Later, we can look into this.

Vivien

[JedTheRed]

Hey Vivien,

Now search through the whole head for an I. Look, if there is actually someone there owning the sense perceptions?

I’ve been taking the investigative approach you mentioned earlier and the answer appears to be a “no”. The sense perceptions are just there. They are felt and perceived but as far as a central “feeler” goes, there doesn’t appear to be one.

Is there someone behind the eyes looking out the eyes, like through two windows?

I can’t find a central perceiver in there - I can’t shake the feeling of it being down to chemical processes in the brain that I can’t understand due to their complexity, but as far as a direct experience goes: I can’t verify that, it’s another belief.

Is there an actual I inside the head hearing with the ears?

No - there is hearing happening, and like the seeing - I tend to offload this feeling to the belief that it must be some complicated chemical process in the brain, and that cloud of whatever it is must be “I”. But I guess even if that is true, “I” wouldn’t be any different to a process like breathing or the process of oxygen transferring to the bloodstream - ie not very personal, and very illusory. Hmm, definitely starting to click for me now. I’ll persist with exploring this and the other pointers as repetition as you suggested.

Is there someone in the forehead thinking thoughts?

Again, no, but it’s sticking a little more this time after my previous realisation for hearing.

Can we say that the colors/shapes that are seen are actual?
And the smell? When a smell is there, it’s actual, isn’t it?

I might be struggling a bit with the conceptual vs actual stuff but I’ll try: yes, I see the colours and shapes, and the smell is there so it must be actual.

Notice, you don’t need thoughts or interpretation to know the presence of a sensation, or a sound, or a smell, right?

Do you need thoughts to see whatever is labelled as ‘table’? To see t that cluster of colours and shapes?

This is true, I don’t need the label “table” to perceive it, same for sounds and smells.

And what is conceptual? How do you know if something is conceptual

Hmm, maybe I am starting to get it as I work through these and give them more thought - anything conceptual is something which I have a label for (eg “table”) and I guess even things that I don’t understand, eg picking up a mechanical component of a machine that I don’t know the name of yet, I can still say “metal, component, small, complicated, engineering” etc - all of that feels like it’s conceptual once I put a label on it but it is actually there to be perceived without needing a label.

If any of that makes sense?

[Vivien]

Hi Jordan,

Hmm, maybe I am starting to get it as I work through these and give them more thought - anything conceptual is something which I have a label for (eg “table”) and I guess even things that I don’t understand, eg picking up a mechanical component of a machine that I don’t know the name of yet, I can still say “metal, component, small, complicated, engineering” etc - all of that feels like it’s conceptual once I put a label on it but it is actually there to be perceived without needing a label.

Exactly.

So actual is what remains when we stop thinking about it.

If nothing remains of something when there are no thoughts about it, then that something is not actual, not a real thing, but just a mentally invented concept or idea.. Can you see that?

Look at the notion of economy. Is it actual? Or just a concept?
And what about university?
And freedom?

This is true, I don’t need the label “table” to perceive it, same for sounds and smells.

Yes, so this is how we are searching for the me. We are searching for a real, actual me, and not just a mentally invented character called Jordan that only ever appear in thoughts, but never in actuality. Do you see?

I can’t find a central perceiver in there - I can’t shake the feeling of it being down to chemical processes in the brain that I can’t understand due to their complexity, but as far as a direct experience goes: I can’t verify that, it’s another belief.

In relative terms the chemical processes in the brain is true. But, does it mean that the chemical process is the me? An agency? An entity living inside those processes? Jordan itself?

In other words, is there an entity inside the brain thinking, feeling, doing, deciding, choosing? Having a life?

I can’t find a central perceiver in there - I can’t shake the feeling of it being down to chemical processes in the brain that I can’t understand due to their complexity, but as far as a direct experience goes: I can’t verify that, it’s another belief.

Look at this closely. How could a chemical process to be an I? do you feel to be a chemical process? Do you experience yourself to be a chemical process in the brain?

Or this is just a thought story, a concept appearing on its own, without someone thinking it?

But I guess even if that is true, “I” wouldn’t be any different to a process like breathing or the process of oxygen transferring to the bloodstream - ie not very personal, and very illusory. Hmm, definitely starting to click for me now.

Exactly. Just notice that this is just a learned idea about the body. Yes, there is a brain in the body, and there are chemical processes in the brain and in the whole body. We are not denying that.

The big question if there is an entity called Jordan INSIDE those processes?
Is there a Jordan inside the brain?

Or Jordan only ever exist as a character in the thought story and mental movie that is on most of the time?


Vivien

[JedTheRed]

Hey Vivien,

If nothing remains of something when there are no thoughts about it, then that something is not actual, not a real thing, but just a mentally invented concept or idea.. Can you see that?

Ah yes, I get it now, thank you!

Look at the notion of economy. Is it actual? Or just a concept?
And what about university?
And freedom?

Economy - it’s conceptual, as is the idea of university. Freedom… I instinctively went to say actual but that was another belief that I have adopted from reading spirituality texts. Freedom is not actual.

We are searching for a real, actual me, and not just a mentally invented character called Jordan that only ever appear in thoughts, but never in actuality. Do you see?

I see now that Jordan is conceptual - there is no me in there. I keep expecting some change in state or consciousness to come with it but I feel like that’s another belief I’ve adopted somewhere at some point in time.

But, does it mean that the chemical process is the me? An agency? An entity living inside those processes? Jordan itself?

I can’t find Jordan, or an entity with agency in there. No molecule or organ, just a concept! No actual Jordan there which makes awareness/life/whatever this is seem like a strange miracle! I wonder if that’s what people mean by the term “witness” in spiritual circles?

In other words, is there an entity inside the brain thinking, feeling, doing, deciding, choosing? Having a life?

No, I can’t find one - which makes me think, well, what am I? It must be similar to how other entities like a tree simply is, as in a tree is treeing and I am a human being, being? Thought/ego/I must simply be another process like breathing but not intrinsic to my being.

How could a chemical process to be an I? do you feel to be a chemical process? Do you experience yourself to be a chemical process in the brain?

It couldn’t possibly be an I any more than another chemical process like water to steam or photosynthesis, there is no I there. I’m starting to see thoughts as a mechanism of the body which has adopted stories, labels and such from modern life (language as a whole I guess) which has uses for concepts for survival but has fooled itself in identifying with concepts. I don’t want to over-analyse this too much but it’s helping me make sense of why it is the way it is.

Or this is just a thought story, a concept appearing on its own, without someone thinking it?

Exactly! It’s just concepts appearing, I feel like I have some degree of agency over thoughts but perhaps the thought of having agency appeared on its own too!

The big question if there is an entity called Jordan INSIDE those processes?
Is there a Jordan inside the brain?

No, it’s becoming clearer and clearer there isn’t. Jordan doesn’t exist.

Or Jordan only ever exist as a character in the thought story and mental movie that is on most of the time

Exactly, when thought is removed, he isn’t there. There is a body, a body that has the capacity for seeing and perceiving things, but no owner called Jordan when I look for him.

[Vivien]

Hi Jordan,

I instinctively went to say actual but that was another belief that I have adopted from reading spirituality texts. Freedom is not actual.

Exactly. When we believe the thought ‘I am free’, then some pleasant, open, relaxed sensation can appear. But those sensations are just sensations, they are not freedom itself. Just as the idea of bondage, or even suffering.

No actual Jordan there which makes awareness/life/whatever this is seem like a strange miracle! I wonder if that’s what people mean by the term “witness” in spiritual circles?

It could, be the word ‘witness’ is more often than not personified and made separate and localized. So that’s just a bit opaque version of the self.

Is there really a witness as an entity, or there is only witnessing happening without any boarders, any location and any specialness (with personhood), without any characteristics whatsoever?

Check, if this is how it is in experience.

No, I can’t find one - which makes me think, well, what am I? It must be similar to how other entities like a tree simply is, as in a tree is treeing and I am a human being, being?

Saying that I am a human being being is still the personal self trying to become something. There is a human body, yes, just as there is a tree. But is the tree an entity, doing things? Or it’s just a biochemical organism, just as the body, without any personhood, any self-reference?

I am the body = I am a separate self
It’s the same belief in disguise.

Exactly! It’s just concepts appearing, I feel like I have some degree of agency over thoughts but perhaps the thought of having agency appeared on its own too!

Well, what if we are not guessing or just inferring that there is no real agency. You need to see this, otherwise this stays on the intellectual level.

So…. is there any control over any thought whatsoever?

There is a body, a body that has the capacity for seeing and perceiving things

This is still part of the trick :)

The body doesn’t see, the body doesn’t perceive. Are you surprised reading this? :) Check in your experience.

Does the eyes see the wall?
Isn’t this just coming as a mental narrative on the plain experience of seeing itself?

Does the eyes aware of what it 'sees'?
what do you even know about eyes without the narrative?

Vivien

[JedTheRed]

Hey Vivien,

Is there really a witness as an entity, or there is only witnessing happening without any boarders, any location and any specialness (with personhood), without any characteristics whatsoever?

I think we're approaching my main stumbling block which is good because it feels like we're being able to define it better than I have been able to before. It appears as though there is a witnessing happening, but I feel like I see a border around my vision and it originates from this body. Maybe I'm too hung up on why awareness needs a body/originates from a body and just need to accept that is how it appears? The specialness around personhood I can see I have been wrongly attributing it to the body, i.e "witnessing/awareness appears to originate from this body, therefore the boundary of 'I' exists within this body".

But is the tree an entity, doing things? Or it’s just a biochemical organism, just as the body, without any personhood, any self-reference?

I am the body = I am a separate self
It’s the same belief in disguise.

This resonates and helps me dismantle the body/I belief somewhat. I'll keep investigating along this path of inquiry.

So…. is there any control over any thought whatsoever?

I am coming around to the idea that thoughts just appear and they're all predetermined - even the thought "I can will myself to have agency over this next thought" could be predetermined (which makes me question free will altogether!) I feel like I'm guilty of trying to intellectualise this rather than just seeing first hand. I'll keep investigating this path too.

Does the eyes see the wall?
Isn’t this just coming as a mental narrative on the plain experience of seeing itself?

Does the eyes aware of what it 'sees'?
what do you even know about eyes without the narrative?

Hmm, ok without the narrative of what the eyes do, I suppose I could cover them or (not that I'd ever try this) I could blind myself but the eyes aren't aware-ing. Even if I cover my eyes (or if I were to go blind) there would still be an awareness of darkness. So even with eyes closed there is a seeing happening.

[Vivien]

Hi Jordan,

It appears as though there is a witnessing happening, but I feel like I see a border around my vision and it originates from this body. Maybe I'm too hung up on why awareness needs a body/originates from a body and just need to accept that is how it appears? The specialness around personhood I can see I have been wrongly attributing it to the body, i.e "witnessing/awareness appears to originate from this body, therefore the boundary of 'I' exists within this body".

Well, this is exactly the illusion of the self.

I am coming around to the idea that thoughts just appear and they're all predetermined - even the thought "I can will myself to have agency over this next thought" could be predetermined (which makes me question free will altogether!) I feel like I'm guilty of trying to intellectualise this rather than just seeing first hand. I'll keep investigating this path too.

Yes, this is intellectual, but you don’t have to feel guilty because of this.

Rather look for the guilty one. Where is that one?

Search for the thinker. Where is it?

Remember, we are looking for an actual I, an actual thinker, an actual someone that feels guilty, and not just concepts, thoughts ABOUT that one.

And when I ask 'where', I am asking to find the exact location for that I, and also for the proof what what is there in that location is the I and just a sensation, or a mental story.

V: Does the eyes see the wall?
Isn’t this just coming as a mental narrative on the plain experience of seeing itself?

Does the eyes aware of what it 'sees'?
what do you even know about eyes without the narrative?

J: Hmm, ok without the narrative of what the eyes do, I suppose I could cover them or (not that I'd ever try this) I could blind myself but the eyes aren't aware-ing. Even if I cover my eyes (or if I were to go blind) there would still be an awareness of darkness. So even with eyes closed there is a seeing happening.

Yes, but notice that you’ve missed the pointers. Please investigate these questions again, and reply to them one-by-one. That can help with focusing on what each specific pointer is pointing to.

Every question is written very carefully, targeting different segments of your beliefs. So please take them literally.

Does the eyes see the wall?

Isn’t this just coming as a mental narrative on the plain experience of seeing itself?

Does the eyes aware of what it 'sees'?

what do you even know about eyes without the narrative?

Vivien

[JedTheRed]

Hey Vivien,

Thank you for your response, I have looked at the pointers again and given them more consideration:

Rather look for the guilty one. Where is that one?

When I look, I can’t locate a guilty one. Just the noticing of a sensation with the label of guilt but no entity inside who is guilty.

Search for the thinker. Where is it?

No sign of a thinker - I had always believed thoughts were appearing in my head but I can’t even say that for sure, it isn’t actual. No thinker to be found.

Does the eyes see the wall?

In my direct experience, no! There is seeing happening. I have knowledge of the story of the eyes seeing, but in my direct experience, there is the wall being perceived but not by the eyes. It’s hard to describe but I think I’m getting it.

Isn’t this just coming as a mental narrative on the plain experience of seeing itself?

Yes - there is simply the experience of seeing. It sounds strange to say it but the eyes are irrelevant for seeing!

Does the eyes aware of what it 'sees'?

As I work through the pointers one by one the answers seem much clearer. No. The eyes are not aware of what it ‘sees’ at all.

what do you even know about eyes without the narrative?

Absolutely nothing! If I open them there is seeing, if I close them there is seeing.