To see clearly so as not to have a spec of "me-ness" remaining

This is a read-only part of the forum. All threads where seeing happens are stored here and come from this forum, the Facebook guiding area and various LU blogs. The complete list, sorted by guide, contains all links. The archives include threads of those that came to LU already seeing as well.
User avatar
Tintu
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:57 pm

Re: To see clearly so as not to have a spec of "me-ness" remaining

Postby Tintu » Fri Nov 02, 2018 9:28 am

Hi Kay,

Thanks for your time and effort.
Is a memory thought any different to any other thought, other than the fact it is given a label ‘memory’?
there is no difference between a "memory thought" and any other thought.
What is the AE of ‘emotion’?
sensation.
There SEEMS to be? I want you to look and see if you can actually find anyone/anything that is feeling a sensation. If need be...go back and do the body exercise.
There is no-one/no-thing feeling the sensation.
Where does sensation end and the knowing of it begin? Is there a dividing line between the knowing of the sensation and the appearance of the sensation or are they one and the same?
There is no dividing line between knowing of sensation and the appearance of sensation. They are one and the same.

"A thought occurs which want to see a "memory" thought"? Is thought an entity? Is thought aware? Can you find a controller/thinker of what thoughts appear and when?
Thought is not an entity. Thought is not aware. There is no thinker or controller of thoughts,its order or when they appear and disappear.
Yes, a thought and sensation may appear simultaneously, but how is it known that they go hand in hand?
in AE, They are not related to each other.
If you don’t think about it, do you know that this sensation is something called ‘fear’?
without thought "I" cannot know 'fear'.
Is there any inherent fear in the sensation itself?
No.
Is there any inherent fear in the label ‘fear’ or the thoughts about fear or the future thought story?
No. There is no inherent fear.
Is there any link between the sensation and the thought? In other words is the sensation ‘coming from’ the thoughts that are labelled as ‘fearful’, or only thought and mental constructs link them
?
in AE, there is no link between sensation and thought. The idea that sensation comes from the thought is an idea.
yes thought links them together.
So to clarify…what you are saying is that there is no one who is the feeler of sensations…that there are only sensations?
Yes.

Is the experience (ie sensation) and the awareness of the sensation two things? Is there experience AND awareness, or is experience self-aware without a separate thing which is aware?
There is only experience which is self-aware without any separation. I will look further with this question.

Thanks
Tintu

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 4494
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: To see clearly so as not to have a spec of "me-ness" remaining

Postby forgetmenot » Fri Nov 02, 2018 10:37 pm

Hello Tintu,
What is the AE of ‘emotion’?
sensation.
The AE of ‘emotion’ is thought. What exactly is it that has emotions? What is it exactly that if feeling sensations?

Thought may point to sensation and label it as ‘emotion’, however does the sensation itself, suggest in any way that it is an emotion, or is it thought that infers that the sensation is an emotion?

Whenever AE is labelled…the label is AE of thought and not the ‘object’ itself.
There SEEMS to be? I want you to look and see if you can actually find anyone/anything that is feeling a sensation. If need be...go back and do the body exercise.
There is no-one/no-thing feeling the sensation.
Here is a clip that shows that the body is not the feeling…that it is simply a mental construct that suggests this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dphlhmt ... e=youtu.be
Is the experience (ie sensation) and the awareness of the sensation two things? Is there experience AND awareness, or is experience self-aware without a separate thing which is aware?
There is only experience which is self-aware without any separation. I will look further with this question.
Go back to the ‘hand on table’ exercise. That exercise was to help you to see if there is an experiencer of experience.

Before we continue…would you like to have a more indepth look at the idea of fear?

Kay
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/

User avatar
Tintu
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:57 pm

Re: To see clearly so as not to have a spec of "me-ness" remaining

Postby Tintu » Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:18 am

Hi Kay,
The AE of ‘emotion’ is thought. What exactly is it that has emotions? What is it exactly that if feeling sensations?
'emotion' just happens and feeling of sensation just happens. There is no agency or ownership of emotion or sensation.
Thought may point to sensation and label it as ‘emotion’, however does the sensation itself, suggest in any way that it is an emotion, or is it thought that infers that the sensation is an emotion?
It is the inference of thought that sensation corresponds to an emotion. There is nothing in sensation suggest that it is an emotion.
Before we continue…would you like to have a more indepth look at the idea of fear?
It would be nice to look into the idea of fear.
Sometime before there was a belief that "I" am a strong person. once that bubble is broken it is seen that "I" am actually fearful of everything and anything. acknowledging it and living with it actually changed something. Now without a "me", "I" do not take responsibility for the fear which arises.

Thanks
Tintu

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 4494
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: To see clearly so as not to have a spec of "me-ness" remaining

Postby forgetmenot » Mon Nov 05, 2018 12:20 am

Hello Tintu,
The AE of ‘emotion’ is thought. What exactly is it that has emotions? What is it exactly that if feeling sensations?
'emotion' just happens and feeling of sensation just happens. There is no agency or ownership of emotion or sensation.
What is it exactly that is “feeling sensations”?
Where does feeling end and sensation begin? Is there a dividing line between feeler and sensation? Or are they one and the same = feelersensation?

Before we continue…would you like to have a more indepth look at the idea of fear?
It would be nice to look into the idea of fear.
Sometime before there was a belief that "I" am a strong person. once that bubble is broken it is seen that "I" am actually fearful of everything and anything. acknowledging it and living with it actually changed something. Now without a "me", "I" do not take responsibility for the fear which arises.
When ‘fear’ appears, become aware of everything that is happening…ie bodily sensations, thoughts etc and then close the eyes and to the following:-

1) Look at the label/thought ‘fear’ itself. See the label/word F E A R or the thought “I am “scared/fearful” as a typewritten word in the ‘mind’s eye’ across the forehead.

Does the label ‘fear’ know anything about fear, or is the word just a bunch of letters?
Is the label ‘fear’ itself fearful?
Can you find anyone/anything in the word itself that is fearful?


2) Then look at the sensation and ignore everything else but the sensation itself.
Inquire into the sensation and ask if the sensation itself knows anything about ‘fear’.

Look and see if the sensation itself is the fearful self. If the words ‘yes’ , or ‘yes, this is the self’ appears, go back to Step 1 and see the words across the forehead and repeat step 1.

Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is fear or that it is fearful?
Does the sensation itself know anything about fear?
Can you find anyone/anything in the sensation itself or behind the sensation that is fearful?


If other random mental images appear during the noticing of the sensation, check to see if those images are the self who is fearful, or are they images that are simply arising and subsiding? If other ‘loud’ thoughts appear, check to see if they are the self that is fearful as you did in step 1.

3) Look at the mental image/outline labelled body.

Does the image/outline itself know anything about ‘fear’.
And then look to see if there is anyone/anything in the colour that knows anything about ‘fear’ or that can be ‘fearful’.


If other random mental images appear during the noticing of the sensation, check to see if those images are the self who is fearful, or are they images that are simply arising and subsiding? If other ‘loud’ thoughts appear, check to see if they are the self that is fearful, as you did in step 1.

4) With eyes still closed look everywhere and see if you can find anyone or anything that is fearful.

When you have done this and if no one/no thing is found, then just sit with the sensation. Just breathe normally, notice the thoughts and images that appear and let them pass on by unless they seem to hang around, then do the appropriate steps above. Allow the sensation all the room it needs in the body without pushing it aside or judging it. If it becomes too intense just take a couple of deep breaths into the sensation itself, and then notice the floor under your feet, notice your backside on the chair and then notice what is in the room you are sitting in and name them out loud, while being aware of the sensation and remember to breathe normally. If the sensation does not dissipate at all or only dissipates a little, that is okay, just notice it, without doing anything with it and just go about your day.

We are not trying to get rid of the sensation labelled ‘fear’ or the arising thoughts or images. We are only LOOKING to see what is actually appearing as opposed to what thought is saying ABOUT what actually IS.

Let me know how you go.

The label ‘fear’ is the AE of thought and not the AE of fear
The sensation labelled ‘fear’ is the AE of sensation and not the AE of fear
The colour labelled ‘me/I/body’ is the AE of colour and not the AE of fear
The thoughts ABOUT fear are AE of thought and not AE of fear

So, is there actual experience of ‘fear’ or what is actually appearing (AE) is label + sensation + colour + thoughts ABOUT fear? Is 'fear' actually known?

Kay
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/

User avatar
Tintu
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:57 pm

Re: To see clearly so as not to have a spec of "me-ness" remaining

Postby Tintu » Mon Nov 05, 2018 9:29 am

Hi Kay,

Good Evening.

I forgot to mention about the video of the rubber hand. This is similar to the "Phantom limb" experiments described here. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantoms_in_the_Brain). Thanks for the video too.
What is it exactly that is “feeling sensations”?
The sensations are felt, I cannot find someone/somebody who feels the sensations.
Where does feeling end and sensation begin? Is there a dividing line between feeler and sensation? Or are they one and the same = feelersensation?
I had a belief that sensation happens and then thought coverts it into feelings. so I assumed that sensation"happens first" and then feeling happens. but now looking again the sensation and feeling of sensation happens without a division. There is no division between sensation and the feeling of sensation. There is no feeler to be found.



Thanks
Tintu

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 4494
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: To see clearly so as not to have a spec of "me-ness" remaining

Postby forgetmenot » Mon Nov 05, 2018 11:58 pm

Hello Tintu,
What is it exactly that is “feeling sensations”?
The sensations are felt, I cannot find someone/somebody who feels the sensations.
This question points to seeing through the idea of separation…that there is something happening to a someone or something (subject/object split).

Thought, sound, sensation, taste, smell, colour are all KNOWN. They aren’t known because they are thought, heard, felt, tasted, smelled or seen….this points to subject/object split. In fact, to be more accurate, nothing is seen, heard, tasted, smelled, thought, or felt. Experience is simply known. All "senses", and "things", are just imaginary divisions of experience.

A known can't know and knowing can't be a known
Known IS knowing.
Knowing IS known.
Not two.

In actual experience, can you separate sensation from the knowing of it?
Is there any line where one stops and the other starts?
You cannot separate them because those are not two things, actually. 'Sensation' and 'knowing of the sensation' are just two phrases that are pointing to exactly the same thing. There is no knowing AND known. Only knowningknown.

There is no colour AND sensation AND smell AND thought AND taste AND sound. There is no AND. The AND points to separation. Coloursensationsmellthoughtastesound = experience (knowingknown) which whole, complete and seamless.

I look forward to your responses to the fear exercise.

Kay
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/

User avatar
Tintu
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:57 pm

Re: To see clearly so as not to have a spec of "me-ness" remaining

Postby Tintu » Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:45 pm

Hi Kay,

Thanks for the experiment.
Does the label ‘fear’ know anything about fear, or is the word just a bunch of letters?
Is the label ‘fear’ itself fearful?
Can you find anyone/anything in the word itself that is fearful?
the label 'fear' is just a bunch of letters. The label 'fear' is not fearful.
The word 'fear' has no-one/no-thing which is fearful.
Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is fear or that it is fearful?
Does the sensation itself know anything about fear?
Can you find anyone/anything in the sensation itself or behind the sensation that is fearful?
The sensation labelled 'fear' does not suggest in anyway that it is fear or fearful.
The sensation does not known anything about fear
"I" cannot find anyone/anything in the sensation or behind the sensation that is fearful.
Does the image/outline itself know anything about ‘fear’.
And then look to see if there is anyone/anything in the colour that knows anything about ‘fear’ or that can be ‘fearful’.
the mental image or outline does not know anything about "fear".
there is nothing/none in the colour that knows about fear or fearful.
So, is there actual experience of ‘fear’ or what is actually appearing (AE) is label + sensation + colour + thoughts ABOUT fear? Is 'fear' actually known?
The actual experience of 'fear' is label+sensation+colour+thoughts about fear.
'fear' is actually not known.
Let me know how you go.
During this experiment thought about all kind of fears came by. Looked at "my" biggest fears.
"I" see that the thought stories about "fear" referring to "loosing something" (say loosing health,body,relationship,respect,wealth,good name etc etc). all of them when looking at is illusions or concepts which actually can be lost any moment in time. I was able to look at the worst case fears and appreciate the fact that the sensation labeled fear reveal unknown corners where the concept of self-hides. on looking at the sensation as pure sensation, the sensation dissipates. it is clearly seen that the sensation labelled "fear" does not know something called "fear" and the thought stories about "fear" does not know about "fear".

Thanks
Tintu

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 4494
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: To see clearly so as not to have a spec of "me-ness" remaining

Postby forgetmenot » Tue Nov 06, 2018 9:17 pm

Hello Tintu,

You can do that exercise at any time and you can use it on any emotion that appears.

Can you give a 100% YES, that there is no separate self? Do you have any questions about anything we have explored. Is there anything that you are not clear about?

Kay
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/

User avatar
Tintu
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:57 pm

Re: To see clearly so as not to have a spec of "me-ness" remaining

Postby Tintu » Wed Nov 07, 2018 2:32 pm

Hi Kay,
Can you give a 100% YES, that there is no separate self? Do you have any questions about anything we have explored Is there anything that you are not clear about?
After starting this exploration, there are changes in "my" way of life, mostly due to the realization that the "thought stories" and actual happenings are not related. The clear seeing of the fact that the thought and the action are not related actually made life more curious about the next action takes place as opposed what is thought. when thoughts and sensations are not "me". when all the sense perceptions are not me, it becomes more clear that there is no "me" in any of the direct experience.

so when you ask the question, can you give a 100%, Yes, what instantaneously came up is a NO.
yet when "I" look at it, I cannot find a "me". There are some shifts in perception but not sure whether that can be considered as a clear seeing of "separate self"

one of the questions I always had is about a "sense of self". the sensation which occurs when "thinking happens" (commonly referred to as talking to yourself), when my name is told aloud or when I become conscious in front of a group of people when they stare at you etc. This sensation in itself does not have anything which says that it is a "sensation of self". yet this sensation is always there. "I" see that seeing through the self-does not alter the thought story about the sensation of self. "I" looked at this sensation for some time and found to be a slippery customer. if possible "I" would like to look into it in more detail.

Thanks
Tintu

User avatar
Tintu
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:57 pm

Re: To see clearly so as not to have a spec of "me-ness" remaining

Postby Tintu » Wed Nov 07, 2018 2:40 pm

Hi Kay,

I asked the following question to one of the previous members who see through this sometime back.
I have not received any answer. just adding here so that it might help you to help me.

following is the question

"
I was reading your thread and came across this.

"It's probably important to understand that the sense of self doesn't indicate a real self ... any more than the line on the horizon indicates a real place..." (Quotation from the person)

"I" am struggling or trying to understand the"Sense of self", This seems to me as the cornerstone of illusion. the feeling is so constant you refer at some point "I" as a constant illusion. I am interested to know what triggered you to see through the "sense of self"?. The point you were making seems to me that it is like any other illusions ( like a mirage, horizon etc).
"
Thanks
Tintu

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 4494
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: To see clearly so as not to have a spec of "me-ness" remaining

Postby forgetmenot » Wed Nov 07, 2018 11:42 pm

Hello Tintu,

So close the eyes and put aside ALL thoughts and just focus on the 'sense of self'. What is it in actual experience? Is it a thought, sound, colour, smell, sensation, sound?

Kay
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/

User avatar
Tintu
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:57 pm

Re: To see clearly so as not to have a spec of "me-ness" remaining

Postby Tintu » Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:58 am

Hi Kay,

Thanks for the question.
"I" am currently looking at it and want to look at this more deeply. I will report back in 2 days.

Thanks
Tintu

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 4494
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: To see clearly so as not to have a spec of "me-ness" remaining

Postby forgetmenot » Thu Nov 08, 2018 12:34 pm

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kay
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/

User avatar
Tintu
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:57 pm

Re: To see clearly so as not to have a spec of "me-ness" remaining

Postby Tintu » Fri Nov 09, 2018 10:12 am

Hi Kay,

Looking at the sense of self, it is seen that it is a "series of self-adapting/dynamic mental images" and an artifact of thought stories. initially, I was thinking there is a sensation associated with it. but looking more and more, it becomes more and more clear that this is thought. it seems thought story about the image of the "other" and a thought story about an image of "me" appears. when I look at each 'individual' in the train station, I see a thought story about the 'sense of self' or me. it is as if since this "sense of self" is 'associated' with "me" for so long that I mistook it as me.

I looked at the "sense of self", it turned out that this is exactly the thing "I" started with. I came to LU with a feeling that there is a 'sense of seer' behind the scene and a 'sense of thinker' behind the thought etc. The investigations have shown that this "sense of seer, hearer, thinker, experiencer' etc are of thought or in other words, without thought stories, there is no separate self-present.

Thanks
Tintu

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 4494
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: To see clearly so as not to have a spec of "me-ness" remaining

Postby forgetmenot » Fri Nov 09, 2018 11:42 am

Hi Tintu,

Nice job of looking at the 'sense of self'! Yes if you look carefully the sense of self has no location, shape or size, nor does it have any characteristic or attributes. It is simply a thought. Sometimes people say that the 'sense of self' is like a vibration, a sensation...but when looking at a sensation how is it known that a sensation is a sense of self? Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is a 'sense of self'? The only thing that suggests that is thought! Once again...nice LOOKING :)

Can you answer the following questions with some detail please, and answer what's true for you rather than any sort of 'ideal' answer. Also please provide examples where asked.

1) Is there a separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form?
Was there ever?

2) Explain in detail what the illusion of separate self is, when it starts and how it works from your own experience.
Describe it fully as you see it now.

3) How does it feel to see this?
What is the difference from before you started this dialogue? Please report from the past few days.

4) What was the last bit that pushed you over, made you look?

5) a) Describe decision, intention, free will, choice and control. What makes things happen? How does it work? Give an example from your own recent experiences to how things happen and how things work.
b) What are you responsible for? Give examples from your own recent experiences to how this works.

6) Anything to add?


Kay
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/


Return to “ARCHIVES”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest