May all be free

[Kaiho]

Hi Rali,

OK… For the next exercise I want you to sit somewhere quiet and observe thoughts.
A thought appears.
In that moment is there anyone or anything which recognises the thought or is being aware of it?

No. The awareness of the thought does not seem separate from the thought.

Can you see anything that is separate from the thought and does the thinking?

No. I don't see anything separate from the thought that is doing the thinking or being aware of the thought.

Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear?

No. It seems like the thoughts are appearing in response to the act of reading these questions. I might think that "I" chose to read these questions, which made these thoughts appear. But I can't find an agent who chose to read these questions anywhere in direct experience.

Could you have done anything to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead?

No.

It seems like "I" can choose to think about the questions or do something else (like get up and get a drink of water, which will lead to different thoughts), but I can't find the "I" who makes this choice. There are two impulses: one to respond to questions and one to get water. I can't find an "I" or a moment when an "I" appears and makes a choice. It just happens.

Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts?

No.

Can you choose not to have painful, negative or fearful thoughts?

No. If I could, I would.

Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?

No.

Is there anything that is responsible for the thoughts like a traffic cop saying which one to go and which one to stay?

I can't find anything that functions like a traffic cop directing thoughts.

Can the flow of thoughts be changed?

They can be interrupted. For instance, if I’m reading a book and someone interrupts me and asks me a question, this changes what thoughts may appear.

Where do thoughts appear from?

Thoughts seem to appear out of nowhere.

Where are they coming from and going to?

Thoughts seem to come out of nowhere and disappear or change. They aren't in movement from one place to another.

Do they appear randomly or in a structured way? Watch like a hawk.

They seems to appear randomly. An event sets off a cascade of thoughts, some of which are related to each other, some not.

Write down a sequence of 5 thoughts in the order that they appear. Now check:
Could you predict the order of their appearance?

No.

Did you know which will be the second or the fourth?

No.

Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing?

Not consciously.

Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle?

Breath-focused meditation involves noticing when the mind wanders away from the breath and bringing it back to the breath. This involves interrupting thoughts, but I can't find an "I" that does the interrupting. It seems like the attention eventually comes back to sensory experience.

How long does that last?

Eventually the mind wanders again.

Test it for the fun of exploration.
It seems that thought has some logical ordered appearance, but look carefully and just notice if there is an organised sequence. Or is it just another thought that says ‘these thoughts are in sequence’ or “they take content from previous thought”, or that "one thought follows another thought"?

It seems like a later thought is an effort to make sense of connections between previous thoughts.

Are thoughts 100% true?

Definitely not.

What are you, when you don't think about what you are?

I don't know.

Thank you,
Liam

[poppyseed]

Hi Liam

No. The awareness of the thought does not seem separate from the thought.

Awesome observation! So awareness of thought and thought are indivisible (divisible only by thought). Are there solid thoughts or just thinking (verb) – no separate thoughts without thought content?

They can be interrupted. For instance, if I’m reading a book and someone interrupts me and asks me a question, this changes what thoughts may appear.

Is there really interruption (without thought content)?

Breath-focused meditation involves noticing when the mind wanders away from the breath and bringing it back to the breath. This involves interrupting thoughts, but I can't find an "I" that does the interrupting. It seems like the attention eventually comes back to sensory experience.

Is there interruption of thoughts or thoughts are just describing “breathing” (sensations) instead of the usual content? Is thinking happening all the time or there is also feeling, seeing, hearing, tasting, and smelling (experiencing which takes different “values”}? To say “interrupting” it suggests that thinking is the main “program”?
What is “mind” in DE?
Is attention separate from thoughts? Is it like a torch that can be pointed to light up experience that is sitting in the darkness? How is this known or is it an assumption? You are looking at your screen right now. Is there attention of the screen (seeing) without the seeing of the screen? How is this attention experienced on its own? Or is there always attention + something? Does it exist on its own if that is the case?

It seems like a later thought is an effort to make sense of connections between previous thoughts.

How is it known that there have been previous thoughts? What are memories? What is the memory ‘made of’? Is there any difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘memory’ thought? WHEN does the memory actually appear?
How is it known that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened? Can a past or future be known? Or all that is known are the AE of thoughts labelled as ‘memory’ that are appearing now?

Love
Rali

[Kaiho]

Hi Rali,

Thanks for responding so quickly. This is probably the last response for the day because I have to work for the rest of the day.

No. The awareness of the thought does not seem separate from the thought.

Awesome observation! So awareness of thought and thought are indivisible (divisible only by thought). Are there solid thoughts or just thinking (verb) – no separate thoughts without thought content?

Thoughts are not solid. There's just thinking. Any division between thoughts is a conceptual division (content saying that this is one thought and that's another).

Is there really interruption (without thought content)?

No. What is interpreted as an "interruption" is thought content saying that there was an interruption.

Breath-focused meditation involves noticing when the mind wanders away from the breath and bringing it back to the breath. This involves interrupting thoughts, but I can't find an "I" that does the interrupting. It seems like the attention eventually comes back to sensory experience.

Is there interruption of thoughts or thoughts are just describing “breathing” (sensations) instead of the usual content?

"Interruption" is a label. What happens is that feeling happens instead of thinking. Thinking might label feelings as "sensations of breathing."

Is thinking happening all the time or there is also feeling, seeing, hearing, tasting, and smelling (experiencing which takes different “values”}?

Thinking is not happening all the time. Feeling, seeing, hearing, tasting, and smelling can happen without conscious thinking. Sometimes it seems as if both thinking and seeing and happening at once. For instance, right now I'm typing facing a window, and I look out the window thinking about your question. It seems as if both thinking and seeing are happening at once, but it might be more accurate to say that thinking and seeing alternate between foreground and background. The alternation happens so quickly that it seems as if thoughts are transparent. But I also notice that even when seeing is dominant, it seems as if some thinking/labeling must be happening unconsciously, because there's a subtle recognition of "trees," even though previous inquiry showed that there was no apple or tree in direct experience. In other words, there's a direct experience of seeing, but there also seems to be an unconscious conceptual overlay that divides the seen and labels "trees," "window," etc.

To say “interrupting” it suggests that thinking is the main “program”?

I wouldn't say it's the main program, but thinking has a tendency to dominate.

What is “mind” in DE?

In the context of the phrase "noticing when the mind wanders away from the breath and bringing it back to the breath," I was using "mind" to mean attention, but attention is not separable from an object.

Is attention separate from thoughts? Is it like a torch that can be pointed to light up experience that is sitting in the darkness? How is this known or is it an assumption? You are looking at your screen right now. Is there attention of the screen (seeing) without the seeing of the screen? How is this attention experienced on its own? Or is there always attention + something? Does it exist on its own if that is the case?

No. Attention cannot be divided from an object of attention. Attention cannot be experienced on its own. There is always attention + something.

It seems like a later thought is an effort to make sense of connections between previous thoughts.

How is it known that there have been previous thoughts?

It's not known in direct experience. Past and future are concepts. Only what is present is real.

What are memories?

Thoughts.

What is the memory ‘made of’?

A memory seems to be "made of" the same "thought stuff" that other thoughts are made of. More specifically, a memory seems to be a reflection or repetition of images, sounds, sensations, smells, and tastes that are *not* present. Thought content says that these repetitions of images, sounds, sensations, smells, and tastes "used to be present" and labels them as a "memory"

Is there any difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘memory’ thought?

The only difference is the label.

WHEN does the memory actually appear?

It can only appear in the present. The present is the only time anything can exist, happen, or appear.

How is it known that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened?

It can't be known. The direct experience of thinking, seeing, hearing, feeling, tasting, smelling in the present is all that can be known.

Can a past or future be known?

No.

Or all that is known are the AE of thoughts labelled as ‘memory’ that are appearing now?

All that is known are the actual experience of thinking/thoughts labelled as "memory" appearing in the present.

Warmly,
Liam

[poppyseed]

Hi Liam
Very good observations!

Thinking is not happening all the time. Feeling, seeing, hearing, tasting, and smelling can happen without conscious thinking. Sometimes it seems as if both thinking and seeing and happening at once. For instance, right now I'm typing facing a window, and I look out the window thinking about your question. It seems as if both thinking and seeing are happening at once, but it might be more accurate to say that thinking and seeing alternate between foreground and background. The alternation happens so quickly that it seems as if thoughts are transparent. But I also notice that even when seeing is dominant, it seems as if some thinking/labeling must be happening unconsciously, because there's a subtle recognition of "trees," even though previous inquiry showed that there was no apple or tree in direct experience. In other words, there's a direct experience of seeing, but there also seems to be an unconscious conceptual overlay that divides the seen and labels "trees," "window," etc.

Is there such a thing as “unconscious” thinking? How is it known then? Or is it assumed? If there are labels then there is thinking present. If seeing is described as “trees” or “windows” then it is known, isn’t it? Some labels have been used for such a long time that become almost unnoticeable (inseparable from seeing) but does that mean that they are unconscious?

It can only appear in the present. The present is the only time anything can exist, happen, or appear.

When you say that “the present is the only time”, is there time at all? The present moment (now) is considered to be a very small fragment of time, or an event that is moving forward on a linear line, coming from the past and advancing to the future.

But is there an experience of the ’now’ moving along the line of time?
Any experience of one ‘moment’ giving way to the next?
Is there any actual or direct experience of one event following another?
How fast is the ‘present moment’ actually moving?
Just look at 'this moment', can you find a point where it began?
How long does the ‘now’ last?
Where does the ‘now’ start, and where does it end?
What is the ‘past’ in actual experience?
So is there actual experience of ‘time’ or thoughts about ‘time’?

Love
Rali

[Kaiho]

Thinking is not happening all the time. Feeling, seeing, hearing, tasting, and smelling can happen without conscious thinking. Sometimes it seems as if both thinking and seeing and happening at once. For instance, right now I'm typing facing a window, and I look out the window thinking about your question. It seems as if both thinking and seeing are happening at once, but it might be more accurate to say that thinking and seeing alternate between foreground and background. The alternation happens so quickly that it seems as if thoughts are transparent. But I also notice that even when seeing is dominant, it seems as if some thinking/labeling must be happening unconsciously, because there's a subtle recognition of "trees," even though previous inquiry showed that there was no apple or tree in direct experience. In other words, there's a direct experience of seeing, but there also seems to be an unconscious conceptual overlay that divides the seen and labels "trees," "window," etc.

Is there such a thing as “unconscious” thinking? How is it known then? Or is it assumed? If there are labels then there is thinking present. If seeing is described as “trees” or “windows” then it is known, isn’t it? Some labels have been used for such a long time that become almost unnoticeable (inseparable from seeing) but does that mean that they are unconscious?

"Unconscious" thinking would not be known.
Some of my writing in the paragraph above was unclear. What I noticed was that even when seeing was dominant and no verbal thinking or labeling seemed to be happening (including no conscious labeling of "trees" or "window"), things still appeared as discrete objects. I assume this is a conceptual overlap that I'm not fully aware of.

It can only appear in the present. The present is the only time anything can exist, happen, or appear.

When you say that “the present is the only time”, is there time at all?

No. There's no time. "Time" is conceptual label inferred from movement and change.

The present moment (now) is considered to be a very small fragment of time, or an event that is moving forward on a linear line, coming from the past and advancing to the future. But is there an experience of the ’now’ moving along the line of time?

No. It's always "now." There's no experience of the "now" moving along a line of time.

Any experience of one ‘moment’ giving way to the next?

No. There's no experience of one "moment" giving way to the next. Any division is conceptual (thought content stating that this is one moment, and that is another).

Is there any actual or direct experience of one event following another?

No. "One event following another" would suggest that the two events are separate, but any separation is conceptual.

How fast is the ‘present moment’ actually moving?

There's no actual experience of the "present moment" moving.

Just look at 'this moment', can you find a point where it began?

No. That would be a thought about where it began, not an actual beginning.

How long does the ‘now’ last?

To measure duration, we would need a beginning and an end, but the "now" does not begin or end. It's always "now."

Where does the ‘now’ start, and where does it end?

It's always "now." The "now" does not start or end. (Thinking arbitrarily says where something begins and ends.)

What is the ‘past’ in actual experience?

In actual experience, the "past" is a label imposed on other thoughts.

So is there actual experience of ‘time’ or thoughts about ‘time’?

There are thoughts about "time," but there is no actual experience of "time."

Warmly,
Liam

[Kaiho]

Thinking is not happening all the time. Feeling, seeing, hearing, tasting, and smelling can happen without conscious thinking. Sometimes it seems as if both thinking and seeing and happening at once. For instance, right now I'm typing facing a window, and I look out the window thinking about your question. It seems as if both thinking and seeing are happening at once, but it might be more accurate to say that thinking and seeing alternate between foreground and background. The alternation happens so quickly that it seems as if thoughts are transparent. But I also notice that even when seeing is dominant, it seems as if some thinking/labeling must be happening unconsciously, because there's a subtle recognition of "trees," even though previous inquiry showed that there was no apple or tree in direct experience. In other words, there's a direct experience of seeing, but there also seems to be an unconscious conceptual overlay that divides the seen and labels "trees," "window," etc.

Is there such a thing as “unconscious” thinking? How is it known then? Or is it assumed? If there are labels then there is thinking present. If seeing is described as “trees” or “windows” then it is known, isn’t it? Some labels have been used for such a long time that become almost unnoticeable (inseparable from seeing) but does that mean that they are unconscious?

"Unconscious" thinking would not be known.
Some of my writing in the paragraph above was unclear. What I noticed was that even when seeing was dominant and no verbal thinking or labeling seemed to be happening (including no conscious labeling of "trees" or "window"), things still appeared as discrete objects. I assume this is a conceptual overlap that I'm not fully aware of.

It can only appear in the present. The present is the only time anything can exist, happen, or appear.

When you say that “the present is the only time”, is there time at all?

No. There's no time. "Time" is conceptual label inferred from movement and change.

The present moment (now) is considered to be a very small fragment of time, or an event that is moving forward on a linear line, coming from the past and advancing to the future. But is there an experience of the ’now’ moving along the line of time?

No. It's always "now." There's no experience of the "now" moving along a line of time.

Any experience of one ‘moment’ giving way to the next?

No. There's no experience of one "moment" giving way to the next. Any division is conceptual (thought content stating that this is one moment, and that is another).

Is there any actual or direct experience of one event following another?

No. "One event following another" would suggest that the two events are separate, but any separation is conceptual.

How fast is the ‘present moment’ actually moving?

There's no actual experience of the "present moment" moving.

Just look at 'this moment', can you find a point where it began?

No. That would be a thought about where it began, not an actual beginning.

How long does the ‘now’ last?

To measure duration, we would need a beginning and an end, but the "now" does not begin or end. It's always "now."

Where does the ‘now’ start, and where does it end?

It's always "now." The "now" does not start or end. (Thinking arbitrarily says where something begins and ends.)

What is the ‘past’ in actual experience?

In actual experience, the "past" is a label imposed on other thoughts.

So is there actual experience of ‘time’ or thoughts about ‘time’?

There are thoughts about "time," but there is no actual experience of "time."

Warmly,
Liam

[Kaiho]

Thinking is not happening all the time. Feeling, seeing, hearing, tasting, and smelling can happen without conscious thinking. Sometimes it seems as if both thinking and seeing and happening at once. For instance, right now I'm typing facing a window, and I look out the window thinking about your question. It seems as if both thinking and seeing are happening at once, but it might be more accurate to say that thinking and seeing alternate between foreground and background. The alternation happens so quickly that it seems as if thoughts are transparent. But I also notice that even when seeing is dominant, it seems as if some thinking/labeling must be happening unconsciously, because there's a subtle recognition of "trees," even though previous inquiry showed that there was no apple or tree in direct experience. In other words, there's a direct experience of seeing, but there also seems to be an unconscious conceptual overlay that divides the seen and labels "trees," "window," etc.

Is there such a thing as “unconscious” thinking? How is it known then? Or is it assumed? If there are labels then there is thinking present. If seeing is described as “trees” or “windows” then it is known, isn’t it? Some labels have been used for such a long time that become almost unnoticeable (inseparable from seeing) but does that mean that they are unconscious?

"Unconscious" thinking would not be known.
Some of my writing in the paragraph above was unclear. What I noticed was that even when seeing was dominant and no verbal thinking or labeling seemed to be happening (including no conscious labeling of "trees" or "window"), things still appeared as discrete objects. I assume this is a conceptual overlap that I'm not fully aware of.

It can only appear in the present. The present is the only time anything can exist, happen, or appear.

When you say that “the present is the only time”, is there time at all?

No. There's no time. "Time" is conceptual label inferred from movement and change.

The present moment (now) is considered to be a very small fragment of time, or an event that is moving forward on a linear line, coming from the past and advancing to the future. But is there an experience of the ’now’ moving along the line of time?

No. It's always "now." There's no experience of the "now" moving along a line of time.

Any experience of one ‘moment’ giving way to the next?

No. There's no experience of one "moment" giving way to the next. Any division is conceptual (thought content stating that this is one moment, and that is another).

Is there any actual or direct experience of one event following another?

No. "One event following another" would suggest that the two events are separate, but any separation is conceptual.

How fast is the ‘present moment’ actually moving?

There's no actual experience of the "present moment" moving.

Just look at 'this moment', can you find a point where it began?

No. That would be a thought about where it began, not an actual beginning.

How long does the ‘now’ last?

To measure duration, we would need a beginning and an end, but the "now" does not begin or end. It's always "now."

Where does the ‘now’ start, and where does it end?

It's always "now." The "now" does not start or end. (Thinking arbitrarily says where something begins and ends.)

What is the ‘past’ in actual experience?

In actual experience, the "past" is a label imposed on other thoughts.

So is there actual experience of ‘time’ or thoughts about ‘time’?

There are thoughts about "time," but there is no actual experience of "time."

Warmly,
Liam

[poppyseed]

Hi Liam
Very good!

As mentioned above, when you asked, “If you look for the I, what is there?” my first thought was to look behind my eyes. I quickly became aware that this was a thought and did not correspond to anything real. Then I looked to see if there were any sensations behind my eyes that might be a self. At first, there were no sensations at all behind my eyes. I investigated other sensations in my head and neck, but they were all passing sensations, not a self.

Let’s explore what “body” and “body parts” are…

1. Take something cold from the fridge – like a can of cooldrink. When you touch the can, what does more accurately describe your experience:
a. Your fingers feeling cold because of touching a cold can; or
b. Coldness - sensation labelled “cold”? With eyes closed, where does the cold appear? Observe the order in which the details appear
2. Sit comfortably on a chair. Close your eyes and relax. Pay attention only to the feeling of your body. Just notice the pure sensations, without relying on thoughts or mental images. Keep your eyes closed and look:
Can it be known how tall the body is?
Does the body have a weight or volume?
In the actual experience does the body have a shape or a form?
Is there a boundary between the body and the chair? At the point where your body contacts the chair, are there two things there, a body and chair, or one, sensation?
Is it "my" body, or is it just a body?
Is there an inside or an outside? If there is an inside - the inside of what exactly? If there is an outside - the outside of what exactly?
What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to? What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?
Can the 'body' do things?

Look very carefully, especially with the last question. You can look several times during the day while doing other things (like washing hands, showering, walking, lying down, etc) before replying.

Love
Rali

[Kaiho]

Thanks for your responses and questions, Rali!

1. Take something cold from the fridge – like a can of cooldrink. When you touch the can, what does more accurately describe your experience:
a. Your fingers feeling cold because of touching a cold can; or
b. Coldness - sensation labelled “cold”? With eyes closed, where does the cold appear? Observe the order in which the details appear

The option that describes my experience more accurately is b. Coldness. With eyes closed, I don't know where the cold is felt.

2. Sit comfortably on a chair. Close your eyes and relax. Pay attention only to the feeling of your body. Just notice the pure sensations, without relying on thoughts or mental images. Keep your eyes closed and look:
Can it be known how tall the body is?

No. Sensations don't have a height. With eyes closed, there is no sense of where the body begins and ends. It feels infinite.

Does the body have a weight or volume?

No. Sensations don't have weight or volume. Weight, volume, and height all rely on standards of measurement and comparison to other objects.

In the actual experience does the body have a shape or a form?

No. With eyes closed, as mentioned above, there is no sense of where the body begins or ends, so it doesn't have a shape or form.

Is there a boundary between the body and the chair? At the point where your body contacts the chair, are there two things there, a body and chair, or one, sensation?

One sensation.

Is it "my" body, or is it just a body?

It's not "my" body. It's not even a body. There's no direct experience of a body, unless we use the label "body" to refer to feeling, or other things that can be directly experienced (hearing, smelling, etc).

Is there an inside or an outside? If there is an inside - the inside of what exactly? If there is an outside - the outside of what exactly?

There is no inside or outside. "Inside" and "outside" are labels created by thinking. Thinking creates division and borders. Otherwise there are no borders and no inside or outside.

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to? What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

The actual experience of the body is feeling (emphasized this exercise). Hearing, smelling, and tasting were also directly experienced in the eyes-closed exercises.

Can the 'body' do things?

No. To say that the body did something would be to assign agency to feeling, hearing, smelling, tasting, and seeing. All of these happen on their own without anyone doing anything.

Warmly,
Liam

[poppyseed]

Hi Liam

Thanks for your responses and questions, Rali!

It’s my pleasure talking to you, Liam!

Here is an even deeper investigation of the body. Please follow each step, don't leave out any. Take your time. Don't move to the next step until the previous one is clearly seen. Repeat the exercise several times.

Stand in front of a bigger mirror.

(1) First, close the eyes and feel the sensations labelled ‘body’.

(2) Then open the eyes and look into the mirror while still paying attention to the sensations. Is there any connection between the felt sensations and the image in the mirror? Or just thoughts (and/or mental images) suggest that there is?

(3) While still paying attention to the sensations move one hand and observe the movement from the mirror. Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and image of movement in the mirror?

(4) Now do the same movement with the hand, but this time look at the hand directly, not from the mirror. Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and the image ‘of movement’? Or only thoughts suggest it?

(5) Now, pay attention only to the image in the mirror. Does the image by itself suggest in any way that is ‘you’ or ‘your body’? Does the image itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘body’ at all? Or are there only colours and shapes?

(6) Where the mirror ends, some parts of the body (probably legs) cannot be seen. Just by the image in the mirror, is there any ‘knowledge’ that there must be legs, or only thoughts and mental images suggest so?

(7) Now turn away from the mirror and look forward (don’t look directly to any body parts). Is there a ‘body’ anywhere when all thoughts and images are ignored, or are there only sensations?

(8) Start to walk slowly. Is there a ‘body walking’, or are there only sensations?
Is there actual experience of ‘walking’ at all?
Or just THOUGHTS ABOUT ‘walking’?
Can such a thing as ‘body’ be found OR just THOUGHTS ABOUT a ‘body’?
Can such a thing as ‘walking’ be found?

(9) Are the sensations localized in space, like ‘going through the room’; OR is there only an image that is labelled ‘room’ and appearing sensations without any location?

Love
Rali

[Kaiho]

Thanks again, Rali! This was a very powerful exercise. As soon as I started reading the questions this morning, I started feeling a bit queasy and dizzy—in a good way because it means a shift is happening. I’ve gone through all the steps twice slowly (once before work, once after) and made sure that each was clearly seen before moving to the next. What has been seen is still being processed, especially the last step. I'm going to repeat the exercises to help them sink in deeper.

Stand in front of a bigger mirror.

(1) First, close the eyes and feel the sensations labelled ‘body’.

(2) Then open the eyes and look into the mirror while still paying attention to the sensations. Is there any connection between the felt sensations and the image in the mirror? Or just thoughts (and/or mental images) suggest that there is?

There is no connection between the felt sensations and the image in the mirror. There are just thoughts and mental images suggesting a connection.

(3) While still paying attention to the sensations move one hand and observe the movement from the mirror. Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and image of movement in the mirror?

There is no connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and image of movement in the mirror. (I had to do this exercise with eyes closed and then eyes open to separate the felt sensations from the image of movement.)

(4) Now do the same movement with the hand, but this time look at the hand directly, not from the mirror. Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and the image ‘of movement’? Or only thoughts suggest it?

There is no connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and the image of movement. Only thoughts and mental images (falsely) indicate that there is a connection.

(5) Now, pay attention only to the image in the mirror. Does the image by itself suggest in any way that is ‘you’ or ‘your body’?

By itself, the image does not suggest in any way that it is 'me' or 'my body'.

Does the image itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘body’ at all? Or are there only colours and shapes?

There are only colors and shapes.

(6) Where the mirror ends, some parts of the body (probably legs) cannot be seen. Just by the image in the mirror, is there any ‘knowledge’ that there must be legs, or only thoughts and mental images suggest so?

Based on the image in the mirror, there are no legs. Only thoughts and mental images suggest that there are.

(7) Now turn away from the mirror and look forward (don’t look directly to any body parts). Is there a ‘body’ anywhere when all thoughts and images are ignored, or are there only sensations?

When all thoughts and images are ignored, there is no ‘body,’ only sensations.

(8) Start to walk slowly. Is there a ‘body walking’, or are there only sensations?

There are only sensations.

Is there actual experience of ‘walking’ at all? Or just THOUGHTS ABOUT ‘walking’?

Just thoughts about ‘walking.’ No experience of ‘walking.’

Can such a thing as ‘body’ be found OR just THOUGHTS ABOUT a ‘body’?

Just thoughts about a ‘body.’

Can such a thing as ‘walking’ be found?

No.

(9) Are the sensations localized in space, like ‘going through the room’; OR is there only an image that is labelled ‘room’ and appearing sensations without any location?

Walking slowly with eyes closed—sensations have no location
Walking slowly with eyes open—there’s only an image labelled ‘room’ and sensations without any location.

I’m excited about the shift that is happening. It will probably be harder to post daily this weekend. We have over 10 people staying with in our house—arriving tomorrow (Friday) and leaving Sunday—so it might be a bit challenging to find the privacy and time to do the exercises. I would like to keep up the daily momentum as much as possible, so I’ll try my best. If I can’t respond every day this weekend, please rest assured that I’m still very engaged and excited to continue.

With thanks and love,
Liam

[poppyseed]

Hi Liam

It will probably be harder to post daily this weekend. We have over 10 people staying with in our house—arriving tomorrow (Friday) and leaving Sunday—so it might be a bit challenging to find the privacy and time to do the exercises. I would like to keep up the daily momentum as much as possible, so I’ll try my best. If I can’t respond every day this weekend, please rest assured that I’m still very engaged and excited to continue.

Thank you for letting me know. Keep looking with the pointers you have so far. Use this as an opportunity for looking what is actually here :)

Then I looked to see if there were any sensations behind my eyes that might be a self. At first, there were no sensations at all behind my eyes. I investigated other sensations in my head and neck, but they were all passing sensations, not a self.

We’ve seen that the actual experience of the body (body parts) is thought. Thought points to sensation, colour, smell :)… and labels it a ‘body’', "head", "eyes", but these cannot be found as actual experience.
Let’s follow this up with the following experiments which look at the belief that that 'visual sights' are coming from the eyes, because when it's investigated the attention automatically goes to the sensation 'of the eyes', and at the same time the mental image or idea 'of the eyes' appear with it. So another sense of self is linked to the sensation 'of the eyes'.

What are the eyes in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image + thoughts about eyes, right?
Can sight (colour) come from a sensation?
Can sight come from an image (of the eyes)?
Can a 'mental image' come from a sensation?
Does a mental image suggest in any way that it is eyes?
Where exactly is the sensation “eyes” located?

So let's look at the idea of a me 'here' (behind the eyes) and a world, others i.e. objects 'out there'. Is there an experiencer of experience, or are they one and the same? We'll use seeing as the means to look.

Firstly, look at whatever is in front of you.
Is it seen from the perspective of two windows (eyes), or is it like a windscreen view?
Now zoom back inwards and try to find that which is seeing.
Is seeing separate from what’s seen, or is there just what’s seen? Is there any awareness separate from experience or is there just experience?
Is what is seen of the body separate to what's seen, or is it part of seamless whole that is seen?
Are seeing and knowing separate or are they one and the same. Is there seeing AND colour or are they one and the same seeingcolour?
Is there two things present? Colour AND experience? Or are colour and experience one and the same?

Now look at the display before you.
When seeing it, is there any division between seeing, see-er, and the seen?
Are these three separate?
If yes, can you find the boundary between the three? Not an imagined, conceptual boundary, but an actual boundary that can be perceived with one or more of the senses?

Love
Rali

[Kaiho]

Hi Rali,

We’ve seen that the actual experience of the body (body parts) is thought. Thought points to sensation, colour, smell :)… and labels it a ‘body’', "head", "eyes", but these cannot be found as actual experience.
Let’s follow this up with the following experiments which look at the belief that that 'visual sights' are coming from the eyes, because when it's investigated the attention automatically goes to the sensation 'of the eyes', and at the same time the mental image or idea 'of the eyes' appear with it. So another sense of self is linked to the sensation 'of the eyes'.

What are the eyes in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image + thoughts about eyes, right?

Yes, eyes are a sensation, a mental image, and thoughts about the eyes.

Can sight (colour) come from a sensation?

No

Can sight come from an image (of the eyes)?

No

Can a 'mental image' come from a sensation?

No

Does a mental image suggest in any way that it is eyes?

No

Where exactly is the sensation “eyes” located?

I don’t know. Sensations do not have a location. Location is a concept.

So let's look at the idea of a me 'here' (behind the eyes) and a world, others i.e. objects 'out there'. Is there an experiencer of experience, or are they one and the same? We'll use seeing as the means to look.
Firstly, look at whatever is in front of you.
Is it seen from the perspective of two windows (eyes), or is it like a windscreen view?

It’s like a windscreen view.

Now zoom back inwards and try to find that which is seeing.
Is seeing separate from what’s seen, or is there just what’s seen?

There is only what’s seen.

Is there any awareness separate from experience or is there just experience?

There is just experience.

Is what is seen of the body separate to what's seen, or is it part of seamless whole that is seen?

It is part of a seamless whole that is seen. (This is harder for me to see when what is seen of the body is moving against a still background.)

Are seeing and knowing separate or are they one and the same. Is there seeing AND colour or are they one and the same seeingcolour?

Seeing and knowing are one and the same. Seeing and color are one and the same.

Is there two things present? Colour AND experience? Or are colour and experience one and the same?

Color and experience are one and the same.

Now look at the display before you.
When seeing it, is there any division between seeing, see-er, and the seen?

There's no division between seeing, see-er, and the seen.

Are these three separate?

No

If yes, can you find the boundary between the three? Not an imagined, conceptual boundary, but an actual boundary that can be perceived with one or more of the senses?

There’s no boundary that can be perceived by the senses.

Thanks again for your questions!
Liam

[poppyseed]

Hi Liam
Very good!

So when you say:

When I ask if there’s a witness, it seems like there’s a center from which everything is being seen, observed. (I don’t know if “witness” is even the right word. Sometimes it seems like a video camera or a mirror, reflecting everything.) There have been short periods of time when this sense of a center has gone away (replaced by a sense of Oneness with everything), but right now the sense of a center is present. I believe this is also a thought.

NB! “seems like”, “feels like” = thought content
Nothing in DE is seems like/feels like, it’s either here or not.
So, is there a witness of any kind, or the witnessing is inseparable from experiencing? (I hope you noticed the choice of verbs over nouns)
Also “you” seem to have difficulty with seeing… How is seeing different from hearing? Is seeing happening in a different “place” or in a different way?

1. Sit comfortably on a chair. Close your eyes. Lift your leg and pay attention to the sensation of “leg lifted”
2. Open your eyes and now pay attention to the sight of the leg only.
3. While looking at the leg, pay attention to the sensation of the leg.
Do sight and sensation appear simultaneously? Do they appear separately? Do they depend on each other? Is there a link between them?

Close your eyes and allow a thought or a series of thoughts to appear.
With your eyes still closed, listen to whatever sound is present for several moments. Now, go back and forth between thoughts and the sound.
Does the sound appear in a different place to thoughts, or do sounds appear in exactly the same placeless place that the thoughts appear in?
Can you find an actual line/wall/boundary that divides the thoughts and the sound? Or is the line a mental construct?
Do you have to overcome any obstruction in order for sound to appear in exactly the same “space” that the thoughts appear in?

Now open your eyes and notice colours.
Do the colours appear in a different place to thoughts and sounds, or do colours appear in exactly the same “space” as thoughts and sounds?
Can you find an actual line/wall/boundary that divides thoughts, sounds and colours, or is that division a mental construct?
Is there an inside and outside?

You can also do the above experiment with sensation and sound instead of thought and sound and see what you find. And taste and sound, smell and sound, thought and colour. There is a variety ways of doing this exercise to see whether or not there is an internal and external divide.

So…Are there different senses or inseparable experiencing: knowing_seeing_tasting_hearing_sensing_smelling_thinking (THIS)? Can the senses be isolated without thought content? Is the knowing of each of them separate or it’s knowing of seeing_hearing_tasting_sensing_smelling_thinking / experience?

Do you still want to explore decision making, free will, intention and choice?
Love
Rali

[Kaiho]

Thank you so much, Rali!

So when you say:

When I ask if there’s a witness, it seems like there’s a center from which everything is being seen, observed. (I don’t know if “witness” is even the right word. Sometimes it seems like a video camera or a mirror, reflecting everything.) There have been short periods of time when this sense of a center has gone away (replaced by a sense of Oneness with everything), but right now the sense of a center is present. I believe this is also a thought.

NB! “seems like”, “feels like” = thought content
Nothing in DE is seems like/feels like, it’s either here or not.
So, is there a witness of any kind, or the witnessing is inseparable from experiencing? (I hope you noticed the choice of verbs over nouns)

The witnessing is inseparable from the experiencing.

Also “you” seem to have difficulty with seeing… How is seeing different from hearing? Is seeing happening in a different “place” or in a different way?

In DE, seeing is not happening in a different “place” or in a different way. These are thoughts. Yet, even after all the exercises we’ve been doing, the mental construct that there’s “something seen” that is “outside” “me” keeps coming back. These are thoughts, not DE, but the realization of that is not stable, or not clearly seen. The mental constructs are still impacting experience.

1. Sit comfortably on a chair. Close your eyes. Lift your leg and pay attention to the sensation of “leg lifted”
2. Open your eyes and now pay attention to the sight of the leg only.
3. While looking at the leg, pay attention to the sensation of the leg.
Do sight and sensation appear simultaneously? Do they appear separately? Do they depend on each other? Is there a link between them?

Sight and sensation appear simultaneously. They don’t appear separately. To say that they’re separate is a thought. It’s also a thought to say that they depend on each other or there’s a link.

Close your eyes and allow a thought or a series of thoughts to appear.
With your eyes still closed, listen to whatever sound is present for several moments. Now, go back and forth between thoughts and the sound.
Does the sound appear in a different place to thoughts, or do sounds appear in exactly the same placeless place that the thoughts appear in?

Sounds appear in the same placeless place that thoughts appear.

Can you find an actual line/wall/boundary that divides the thoughts and the sound? Or is the line a mental construct?

The line is a mental construct.

Do you have to overcome any obstruction in order for sound to appear in exactly the same “space” that the thoughts appear in?

Sound appears in the same “space” that thoughts appear in without “me” overcoming any obstruction.

Now open your eyes and notice colours.
Do the colours appear in a different place to thoughts and sounds, or do colours appear in exactly the same “space” as thoughts and sounds?

Colors appear in the same “space” as thoughts and sounds.

Can you find an actual line/wall/boundary that divides thoughts, sounds and colours, or is that division a mental construct?
Is there an inside and outside?

The division is a mental construct. There’s no inside and outside.

You can also do the above experiment with sensation and sound instead of thought and sound and see what you find. And taste and sound, smell and sound, thought and colour. There is a variety ways of doing this exercise to see whether or not there is an internal and external divide.

So…Are there different senses or inseparable experiencing: knowing_seeing_tasting_hearing_sensing_smelling_thinking (THIS)?

Inseparable experiencing: knowing-seeing-tasting-hearing-sensing-smelling-thinking.

Can the senses be isolated without thought content?

The senses cannot be isolated without thought content. Division is a mental construct.

Is the knowing of each of them separate or it’s knowing of seeing_hearing_tasting_sensing_smelling_thinking / experience?

It’s the knowing of experience.

Do you still want to explore decision making, free will, intention and choice?

Yes. I’d like to very much. These exercises still feel slippery, in the mental construct of inside/outside keeps slipping back. I hope that makes sense.

Thank you,
Liam