Got stuck in tiger's mouth

[poppyseed]

Hi Shafigh

I know it is tiresome but can you please avoid giving bulk answers? This time it was straightforward, but sometimes it can get confusing. I would appreciate it as it will improve communication :)

b. Coldness - sensation labeled "cold" there are no fingers and can separate

Good! Similarly to seeing, are there feeling and sensations, or just feeling? Without the labels can you say where one sensation ends and the other begin (having in mind all the subtle “ones” in between)?
Please do not aim to give me the right answer (the answer you think I want to hear) but what is true to you at the moment. There are no medals at the end for no one :). It's important that you really see where I'm pointing. Also please don't forget to give me an example of a daily activity broken down as the cup of coffee example with each reply!

there is no "body" to do things if labels are removed.

That sounded a bit like a conclusion (aka thought about) and we are interested in plain observations.
Here is an even deeper investigation of the body. I know that you enjoy “weird” exercises :) 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

[bysa]

Hi Rali,

Sorry if my answer was confusing, I'll try to answer every question separately.

Similarly to seeing, are there feeling and sensations, or just feeling? Without the labels can you say where one sensation ends and the other begin (having in mind all the subtle “ones” in between)?

What's the difference between feeling and sensation? is the difference that for feeling there is a "thing" that feels but for sensation it's just sensing?
Without labels nothing is separate from another, I'm having a hard time to differentiate between anything without labels. No boundaries in seeing, no boundaries in hearing, no boundaries in touching, no boundaries in smelling, no boundaries in tasting and even no boundaries in thoughts.


Daily example:
Typing
Thoughts about what to type: Simply = thought (thinking)
Seeing the screen: Simply = colour (seeing)
Feeling the keyboard: Simply = sensation (feeling)
Hearing the keyboard clicking: Simply = sound (hearing)

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?

No connection at all, just thoughts suggesting

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?

No connection

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 a connection this time between the image of movement and felt sensation

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?

Only colors, image by itself doesn't have any connection to me or my body

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?

There is no knowledge that there must be legs only thoughts about it

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?

No body anywhere, just sensations

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

only sensations

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

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?

Without labels, no such a thing as body or walking can be found


My experience is that without seeing, thought groups sensations and labels that as walking. If I close my eyes and walk, I can't tell that I'm walking, there's just sensation like I feel my feet on the ground.

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?

no location, just thoughts labeling some colors as room, some as something else. No sensing as "I" move through the space, there is no difference between I'm moving through the space and space is moving and I'm fixed.


Thanks,
Shafigh

[poppyseed]

Hi Shafigh

What's the difference between feeling and sensation? is the difference that for feeling there is a "thing" that feels but for sensation it's just sensing?
Without labels nothing is separate from another, I'm having a hard time to differentiate between anything without labels. No boundaries in seeing, no boundaries in hearing, no boundaries in touching, no boundaries in smelling, no boundaries in tasting and even no boundaries in thoughts.

Here we use “sensations” only as the “output” of feeling, similarly to colour (output of seeing), sound (output of hearing), etc. I think the separation is done for clarity of sense output.
We don’t use “touching” as it supposes “fingers” or “skin” (outside and inside), and when we look at DE we see that this relationship happens only in thoughts. If you remember we investigated this with a “cold object”. “Feeling” describes the experience of all sensations as similar, no matter their “source” – “rapid heartbeat” is similar to “cold can”, even though once is felt “through touch”/”externally” and the other “internally”. The difference comes from the story of “outside the skin” and “inside the skin”, creating the idea of the body as a vessel of a self, and at the same time reinforcing the idea of objects (being touched), while all there is, is just seeing, feeling, hearing, smelling, tasting, and thinking.
My question : “are there feeling and sensations, or just feeling?” was actually about discrete sensations. Are there separate discrete sensations or just feeling (verb) without the labels? I find verbs describe better the flux of what is happening. But yes, you are right, even the DE labels are empty of inherent existence. You can't separate hearing from seeing from feeling…Without the labels there is just THIS. In Buddhism the term “suchness” or “thusness” (whatever is happening) is used, referring to the nature of reality free from conceptual elaborations and the subject–object distinction. I like the word “THIS” as it is more like a pointing word – pointing to whatever is directly experienced like an arrow with no extra meaning – rather than labelling the experience.

no location, just thoughts labeling some colors as room, some as something else. No sensing as "I" move through the space, there is no difference between I'm moving through the space and space is moving and I'm fixed.

Yes! If you break it down it will look like that:
Moving through the room
Feeling feet touching ground, simply = sensation (feeling)
Seeing the room around me, simply = colour (seeing)
Thinking about “difference between I'm moving through the space and space is moving and I'm fixed”, simply = thought (thinking)

Ok let’s explore thinking…
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?
Can you see anything that is separate from the thought and does the thinking?
Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear? Could you have done anything to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead? Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts?
Can you choose not to have painful, negative or fearful thoughts?
Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?

Is there anything that is responsible for the thoughts like a traffic cop saying which one to go and which one to stay? Can the flow of thoughts be changed?
Where do thoughts appear from? Where are they coming from and going to? Do they appear randomly or in a structured way? Watch like a hawk.

Write down a sequence of 5 thoughts in the order that they appear. Now check:
Could you predict the order of their appearance?
Did you know which will be the second or the fourth?
Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle? How long does that last? 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"?

Are thoughts 100% true?
What are you, when you don't think about what you are?
Love
Rali

[bysa]

Hi Rali,

Here we use “sensations” only as the “output” of feeling, similarly to colour (output of seeing), sound (output of hearing), etc. I think the separation is done for clarity of sense output.
We don’t use “touching” as it supposes “fingers” or “skin” (outside and inside), and when we look at DE we see that this relationship happens only in thoughts. If you remember we investigated this with a “cold object”. “Feeling” describes the experience of all sensations as similar, no matter their “source” – “rapid heartbeat” is similar to “cold can”, even though once is felt “through touch”/”externally” and the other “internally”. The difference comes from the story of “outside the skin” and “inside the skin”, creating the idea of the body as a vessel of a self, and at the same time reinforcing the idea of objects (being touched), while all there is, is just seeing, feeling, hearing, smelling, tasting, and thinking.
My question : “are there feeling and sensations, or just feeling?” was actually about discrete sensations. Are there separate discrete sensations or just feeling (verb) without the labels? I find verbs describe better the flux of what is happening. But yes, you are right, even the DE labels are empty of inherent existence. You can't separate hearing from seeing from feeling…Without the labels there is just THIS. In Buddhism the term “suchness” or “thusness” (whatever is happening) is used, referring to the nature of reality free from conceptual elaborations and the subject–object distinction. I like the word “THIS” as it is more like a pointing word – pointing to whatever is directly experienced like an arrow with no extra meaning – rather than labelling the experience.

Thank you for the explanation

Ok let’s explore thinking…

oh, my favorite topic!

In that moment is there anyone or anything which recognises the thought or is being aware of it?

It seems there is something that recognizes the thought because thought vs no thought can be differentiated

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

not sure about doing the thinking, since thoughts arise on themselves, but there is something separate from the thoughts because thoughts are recognized

Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear? Could you have done anything to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead? Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts?

No, No, and No. But, It feels that I can grab a thought to make it stay longer or ignore it and it vanishes. I don't know why I grab some thoughts but it feels like I have the power to make them stay longer and continue.

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

I can distract myself by thinking of something else

Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?

There seems to be a level of choice. I can choose to think about my upcoming vacation, but if you ask my why this thought and not something else, I have no idea

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

Yes, there is. I can't choose to always have happy thoughts but when thoughts appear I can pick one to follow or just ignore

Where do thoughts appear from? Where are they coming from and going to? Do they appear randomly or in a structured way?

sometimes randomly, sometimes they are connected, one leads to another

Write down a sequence of 5 thoughts in the order that they appear. Now check:

when to brush my teeth
what am I thinking right now
does my answer make sense
should I book anything else for my vacation
oh, I didn't respond to my colleague's email

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? Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle? How long does that last? Test it for the fun of exploration.

Not in the middle, but I can make it last less by distracting myself

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"?

Well, some of them seem to me to be organized and in sequence

Are thoughts 100% true?

No

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

not sure, doesn't happen a lot, but not a thing, something completely different than when I think about myself


Thank you,
Shafigh

[poppyseed]

Hi Shafigh

It seems there is something that recognizes the thought because thought vs no thought can be differentiated

but there is something separate from the thoughts because thoughts are recognized

Seems like, feels like = thought content
Nothing in DE is seems like or feels like. It’s either here or not.
So LOOK! What is here besides the thought? Do you see a detector of words that recognizes them? What does it look like – form/color; does it speak etc – how can you describe it using the five senses? Is there anything that recognizes the thoughts or thoughts just ARE? You say “thought” vs “no thought”, but isn’t it still a thought that which labels “something” to be “something” or not?
Now let’s LOOK even deeper… For there to be something that recognises, it has to exist independently of everything else. So let's see Where does recognition stop and the thoughts start, is there a visible border? Are the thinker/recogniser, thought, and thinking separate? Can there be recognition without objects (e.g. thoughts)? Can there be objects without recognition? Is recognition ever actually experienced or is it just an idea, an abstraction? Is there any entity that is conscious/aware/recognises what is happening, or there is only what is happening?

Please LOOK, don’t intellectualise, imagine or remember from your previous experience or teachings!

But, It feels that I can grab a thought to make it stay longer or ignore it and it vanishes. I don't know why I grab some thoughts but it feels like I have the power to make them stay longer and continue.

Yes, there is. I can't choose to always have happy thoughts but when thoughts appear I can pick one to follow or just ignore

Feels like? Let's look at all of these assumptions
How exactly do you grab onto thoughts? With your hands? How exactly do you make them stay longer if you are not the thinker (you can’t predict them)? How do you pick them? Please describe the process/mechanics of it? Is there a possibility that thoughts are self-organized, with some taking prevalence more than others – aka conditioning?
Thoughts are built out of concepts. Groups of concepts taken for truth of how things are become beliefs upon which new ideas land and stick, creating an even bigger, more magnificent castle of concepts. What seems to be “the world,” the totality of experience of all that is happening, is a creation of language, and words are the building blocks that create the story about it. They stick to each other like matching puzzle pieces (stories about stories). Language is basically the relationship between concepts – how they are organised. That carries meaning on top of the meaning of the actual concepts. That is why different concepts mean different things to different people and in different situations. One very good example of how words and language are just pointers to but not the actual DE, and how meaning is formed, is AI. GPT (Generative pre-trained transformers) are large language models that are based on the semantic relationships between words in sentences (natural language processing). GPT models are trained on a large amount of text. The training consists in predicting the next token (a token being usually a word, sub-word, or punctuation). Throughout this training, GPT models accumulate knowledge about the world, and can then generate “human-like” text by repeatedly predicting the next token. But does AI have any direct experience of what it’s talking about? Does it understand it or is it just a combination of concepts? Is AI an entity or just a mechanism for building sentences?

Not in the middle, but I can make it last less by distracting myself

Actually this is a good time to look at the idea of focus and attention.
Close your eyes and sit quietly for 10-15 minutes. Watch what focus does. Focus on focusing, attention itself.

Do you move it, or it moves by itself?
Hold focus on breath - see how it moves to thoughts, sensations, feelings, sounds.
Is this something you control?
What moves attention? Can anything be found that moves attention, or does attention/focus move on its own?
Is thought in control of attention? What is focus/attention? Is focus like a torch that lits up experience? Does experience sits around (in the dark) waiting to be shined upon? How is this known or is it assumed?
Love
Rali

[bysa]

Hi Rali,

So LOOK! What is here besides the thought? Do you see a detector of words that recognizes them? What does it look like – form/color; does it speak etc – how can you describe it using the five senses?

I can't describe it using the five senses.

Is there anything that recognizes the thoughts or thoughts just ARE?

I can't tell if it's another thought or something else, but I can tell that if there is something besides thought, I can't describe it using the five senses.

You say “thought” vs “no thought”, but isn’t it still a thought that which labels “something” to be “something” or not?

Yes, that's a thought that labels, labels don't exist without thoughts

Where does recognition stop and the thoughts start, is there a visible border?

Recognition never stops, no border, everything is inside the recognition

Where does recognition stop and the thoughts start, is there a visible border? Are the thinker/recogniser, thought, and thinking separate? Can there be recognition without objects (e.g. thoughts)? Can there be objects without recognition? Is recognition ever actually experienced or is it just an idea, an abstraction? Is there any entity that is conscious/aware/recognises what is happening, or there is only what is happening?

I know you asked me not to intellectualize, imagine, or draw from previous experience. Without thinking, I can't answer your questions. I don't know if there can be objects without recognition or recognition without objects. What does "object" mean here? Does it refer to labels like "apple" or to sensory experiences? This is becoming very confusing. You're asking questions that I can't answer without thinking.

The reason I use phrases like "feels like" or "seems like" is that if I don't intellectualize, these are the next closest ways I can express my understanding.

How exactly do you grab onto thoughts? With your hands? How exactly do you make them stay longer if you are not the thinker (you can’t predict them)?

Not with hands, but by thinking more about that thought. Some of them random, I can't predict, some of them not random. Like right now I can think about my vacation. I think it's obvious, you can tell anyone to think about x,y,z

How do you pick them? Please describe the process/mechanics of it?

there is a thought to take a shower, another one coming to let's first answer this post, another one about I need to buy some milk, but now I pick the one about answering this post, what do I want to answer, should I reply in the forum or use a notepad, ...

Is there a possibility that thoughts are self-organized, with some taking prevalence more than others – aka conditioning?

could be, if there is a thought that acts as me, acts as the chooser, sure.

But does AI have any direct experience of what it’s talking about? Does it understand it or is it just a combination of concepts? Is AI an entity or just a mechanism for building sentences?

AI doesn't have any direct experience of what it’s talking about and that's why it's still recognizable from humans, is predictable. the way humans think is not just semantic relationships between words in sentences. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. AI might mimic certain human behaviors, but it lacks the underlying complexity and depth. There is much more complexity in human behavior than just NLP. Even for a AI to behave like human it needs huge amount of data to be trained on that is a very naive equivalent of life experience for humans.
AI doesn't "understand" concepts in the human sense. It recognizes patterns and relationships in data and generates responses based on those patterns.

Close your eyes and sit quietly for 10-15 minutes. Watch what focus does. Focus on focusing, attention itself.

Do you move it, or it moves by itself?
Hold focus on breath - see how it moves to thoughts, sensations, feelings, sounds.
Is this something you control?

I move it, I am in control at least at the beginning until I lose control. But, it's something that can be trained, that's why ppl who do mindfulness and one-pointedness can control focus and attention over time.

What moves attention? Can anything be found that moves attention, or does attention/focus move on its own?

There is something that moves attention or can move attention

Is thought in control of attention?

Yes, in my experience what recognized thoughts which can be another thought that fakes me is in control of attention.

What is focus/attention? Is focus like a torch that lits up experience?

that's close to my experience

Does experience sits around (in the dark) waiting to be shined upon? How is this known or is it assumed?

I don't know if it sits around in the dark or not, or waiting, but when I bring my focus/attention on something the experience happens. Like when I decide to turn and look at my back, the experience of whatever is happening behind me comes into existence for me.


I like your GPT/Robot example. That Robot sees, hears, smells, tastes, and with GPT thinks exactly like humans. Are you and that Robot the same? killing a human vs destroying that Robot feels the same to you?



If there are only senses then life becomes meaningless, why bother at all?

!

[poppyseed]

Hi Shafigh

I like your GPT/Robot example. That Robot sees, hears, smells, tastes, and with GPT thinks exactly like humans. Are you and that Robot the same? killing a human vs destroying that Robot feels the same to you?

If there are only senses then life becomes meaningless, why bother at all?
!

I didn't say anything about robots, I was giving an analogy to how language and meaning forms without a thinker. Nothing really describes THIS (no analogies), only looking truly helps. BUT...
Do you expect that somehow you are going to turn into a zombie or a vegetable? Life expresses itself and "we" are part of this expression. In some way, we get the idea that we are life and we dictate what is happening, we think, we do things and we need protection but when we examine this closely we see it for what it is - just a mirage, an illusion. There is no doer and thinker, there never was. Things are just happening as always.
Are you afraid that you might not be in control of life? It’s helpful to notice fears that are present. A fear usually is there to protect us (aka the imaginary self) from harm. In this case it protects “you” from changing and losing your ”humanity”. They come to show you the way through what is ready to be explored. Fear and resistance work together as a protective mechanism, a signal to not go somewhere unknown, unsafe, or dark. The fear itself is not to be feared. It's a mechanism. Working perfectly as a security system. It is protecting something from being found out. It is a sensation triggered by thoughts. Look at the fear and just let it be here. Find where in the body is being felt, bring it closer, invite it to share its wisdom. It's fine to just let it be. Respect it. Bow to it. Then look what is behind fear. What is in need of that protection??

Questioning core beliefs does not destroy anything real. Only the false falls away, the false that distorts the view, that holds tension, anxiety, and suffering. The false falling away may feel like a loss, but nothing worth keeping gets lost.
In other words, nothing stops being what it already is. Beliefs that no longer serve are no longer needed, and it’s okay to move past them and explore with fresh eyes. So take a peek, look behind the fear. What is there that feels threatened? You may find one of two things: nothing at all or something that wants and needs to be seen. Keep looking to see what is there.
When it is seen that there is nothing behind the fear, the protection mechanism stops protecting that nothing. This may come like a shock, but what is the worst thing that can happen to nothing? Did you believe in Santa when you were a kid? If so, do you remember it was such a magic, a mystery, and then one day you realise that Santa is not real. What changed? Did Christmas change? Did your character change? Did Santa change? Or was it a simple drop of a belief?
Unfortunately, it also means that there is nothing for you/self to gain, no one to benefit out of this inquiry. You see, it boils down to expectations/thoughts about enlightenment. So let me ask you again, what do you truly expect that will happen once the no self is seen? You said you want: “Life will be frictionless, simply flowing in whatever direction it moves, like a leaf in a river, going with the current without the need to know where it is going.” It already is, but is this really what you want out of this or you want a solution to all your problems in life, eternal bliss, etc.? Be honest here. That is why I asked you to confirm reading "What LU is NOT..."
End of suffering does not come magically. It ends when suffering is seen for what it is. It comes with seeing what is actually here and what is not.
So please, spend some time with this. Please let me know if the fear and resistance that will be an obstacle to the inquiry.
All my love
Rali

[bysa]

Hi Rali


Yesterday, after reading your post and answering the questions, I felt an overwhelming terror by the end. It was devastating—I felt physically sick. Something inside me wanted to scream, run away, flip the table. I couldn't accept the possibility that maybe there are only senses and that my perception of myself might not exist. I couldn't sleep and still can't fathom this possibility. As I lay awake last night, I wondered why I felt such fear and why this was so shocking. I realized that despite claiming to have no expectations, I do have them. I expect to flow with life, but only in a way that feels good to me. I expected the flow to be peaceful. There is a gut feeling of resistance to the possibility that awakening might not be what I imagined.

Do you expect that somehow you are going to turn into a zombie or a vegetable?

Yes, it's possible that I could lose all motivation to do or want anything. If there's nothing more than just sensation, if there's no "me" deciding to do something, then why should I bother with anything? Why should I care about my parents? Why should a mother or father care about their child? Why do the right thing? Why? My personal will has been my guide through life, and discarding it leaves me with nothing to navigate by. I'm lost.

In some way, we get the idea that we are life and we dictate what is happening, we think, we do things and we need protection

Yes

Are you afraid that you might not be in control of life?

Yes, this path is heading in a direction that I can no longer control. I thought I knew where I was going, but the further I continue, the more I realize it's taking me somewhere else, and I can't escape.

It’s helpful to notice fears that are present. A fear usually is there to protect us (aka the imaginary self) from harm. In this case it protects “you” from changing and losing your ”humanity”.

Yes, I'm afraid of losing my "humanity" and everything I've known about myself, others, the world, values, and what's right and wrong. I can't just let go completely because I would be abandoning, in many ways, the human condition and leaving behind my loved ones. I don't mean physically leaving them, of course, because I'll still be there as before, but internally, I'd be leaving them behind.

What is in need of that protection??

That's right, fear is here to protect me. It's a visceral feeling of dying. Fear of not only getting rejected by everyone but also myself.

So take a peek, look behind the fear. What is there that feels threatened?

Sense of I, a separate entity that needs to do things in order to survive

Questioning core beliefs does not destroy anything real. Only the false falls away, the false that distorts the view, that holds tension, anxiety, and suffering. The false falling away may feel like a loss, but nothing worth keeping gets lost.
In other words, nothing stops being what it already is. Beliefs that no longer serve are no longer needed, and it’s okay to move past them and explore with fresh eyes. So take a peek, look behind the fear. What is there that feels threatened? You may find one of two things: nothing at all or something that wants and needs to be seen. Keep looking to see what is there.
When it is seen that there is nothing behind the fear, the protection mechanism stops protecting that nothing. This may come like a shock, but what is the worst thing that can happen to nothing? Did you believe in Santa when you were a kid? If so, do you remember it was such a magic, a mystery, and then one day you realise that Santa is not real. What changed? Did Christmas change? Did your character change? Did Santa change? Or was it a simple drop of a belief?

I can understand what you mean but I am not there to see "nothing" behind the fear. I feel there is me behind the fear and this is an existential fear, terror.

So please, spend some time with this. Please let me know if the fear and resistance that will be an obstacle to the inquiry.

I feel like my world is crumbling, and I have nowhere to land. It seems like I have to choose between losing everyone and everything, including myself, and not knowing what will happen to what I care about, or continuing to live in this in-between state. The ironic part is, that I might not even have a choice. I was chasing enlightenment and awakening, but now it is chasing me and doesn't give a damn about what I wanted and had in mind about it.

Thank you Rali,
Shafigh

[poppyseed]

Hi Shafigh

Thank you so much for sharing this with me!

Ok… so let’s look at this calmly.

Yes, it's possible that I could lose all motivation to do or want anything. If there's nothing more than just sensation, if there's no "me" deciding to do something, then why should I bother with anything? Why should I care about my parents? Why should a mother or father care about their child? Why do the right thing? Why? My personal will has been my guide through life, and discarding it leaves me with nothing to navigate by. I'm lost.

First of all, it’s not that you existed before and you will stop existing after the inquiry – you just never existed. You don’t have to say good bye to your family and friends :). You are not dying, you were never born. The reason I asked you about Santa was because it’s a good analogy for the self. You see, the spirit of Christmas is not Santa, it’s the giving and joy, family coming together, cooking food and enjoying the food together. So, after finding out Santa is not real did any of this change – there were still presents and giving, joy, good food, family, love. The spirit of Christmas remains. Similarly, when finding that self was never there. These things – caring for others, (children and parents) - that is not the self doing it, they just are. It never needed a self to begin with for them to happen. Can you actually decide not to care about your loved ones? You can certainly think about it and argue about it :). So it does not depend on the self or the belief in the self. Life continues lifing. After gating, “you” will still go to work, worry about money, care about and love your children or spouse, your parents and friends. In a way finding home is just noticing that you have never left home. Have you heard of the Zen proverb: “Before enlightenment, chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood, carry water.” What do you think it means?
Also, about loved ones, are they separate from you? Is there an “I” in each of them? How do you know that? Or is it assumed?
You may argue then, what is the point of this inquiry, when there are no benefits for “me”. Well, the only thing that we change here are perceptions. Let me say it in a different way – we can’t change the sensation of “physical pain” but emotional suffering is optional and a matter of perception.

Yes, this path is heading in a direction that I can no longer control. I thought I knew where I was going, but the further I continue, the more I realize it's taking me somewhere else, and I can't escape.

That's right, fear is here to protect me. It's a visceral feeling of dying. Fear of not only getting rejected by everyone but also myself.

It is a very understandable fear of not being in control. It is scary to let go, of course. But like I said, fear is here for a reason— protection. Can you honour that fear? Just look at it as a powerful mechanism and honour it. It does its job. It’s okay. You can let it go. You have never been in control. That’s the point of the inquiry – to see the illusion – things just look like something else but they never were that something. The mirage of an oasis in the desert was never an oasis. It’s easy to let go when you see that there has never been an option to control what is. The idea of control is one of these illusions and we will see it if you want truth. Wanting to be in control is painful. One is trying to get all the ducks in a row all the time. The environment and others must be controlled, otherwise...unwanted emotions will arise, and that means suffering. In simple everyday life, what is happening is happening.

Truth is simple— life is. If truth is all you want— look, it’s in front of your eyes! There is no separate life force that moves the separate body. There is no thinker, no watcher, but experience happening. Now.
Now look at the idea that there really is no you; it’s okay, whatever fear comes up, acknowledge, honour, and let go. Look closer. Is it possible? Is it true?
Ironically, to stop the fear of looking for the self and all the potential threats, you have to look for the self to see that it was never there so it doesn't need that protection :)
So... Don’t read the rest unless you are ready to look!

I can understand what you mean but I am not there to see "nothing" behind the fear. I feel there is me behind the fear and this is an existential fear, terror.

OK… so can you please describe this sense of “me”? You say that you see “something” (not nothing). Would you describe the body (aka sensations and colours) or anything else?
Let’s say that you have lost your keys and you swear that you left them in your coat. You go to look and check all the pockets - the keys are not there. You swear they must be as that was the last place you remember them. You have a vivid memory of putting them there after you left the house. But when you check they are not there. At this point you can keep believing that the keys are in your pocket, or you can admit you were mistaken.

This is just like that. You may see clearly that the self is an illusion but still feel a sense of self - just like the keys. But feeling something to be true and seeing that it is or is not is different. This is why we may find ourselves coming back to your expectations at the start and at the end.

Now, I’d like to ask you to explore this SENSE of self very-very thoroughly. Not by thinking about it, but by FEELING it. Focus on the sense of self and inquire:

Does the sense of self have a location?
Does the sense of self have a shape or a size (different from the body)?
Does the sense of self say or communicate anything?
If the answer is yes, how does the sense do this exactly?
Does the sense of self have any characteristics or attributes?
Is there a sense of self in seeing, hearing, tasting?
Where and when does the sense of self arise exactly?
What is the sense of self ‘made of’? An image? Sound? Taste? Smell? Sensation? Thought? Is really a sense, or just a thought about it, a word (“self”)?
What is found?
Please be 100% honest!

Also… What discerns it, distinguishes it, filters it out from "not me", etc.?
If and when that sense of "me" arises, what creates and/or notices it?
When there is a sense of "me", and thus "not me" as well, look for what "in here" looks out at what is "out there" (i.e., "not me")?

And having experienced a "me" your whole life: was it because you identified with an aspect of experience, or identified as an aspect of experience? Is/was there a difference between identifying with and identifying as something?
Love
Rali

[bysa]

Hi Rali,

First of all, it’s not that you existed before and you will stop existing after the inquiry – you just never existed.

I am not sure by "you" we mean the same thing, but I can't get over the fact that I don't exist. There is this being that I can't deny. Maybe that's the same "suchness" you mentioned a couple of posts ago. That never stopped existing, I can't stop existing. This "I" is not the same as my name or identity or even humanness, it's just that being without any form or shape or label.

Can you actually decide not to care about your loved ones?

As you mentioned, I can think about it but whether in actuality I can or cannot I never tried to know, but if I have to guess, probably no. This sense of me is the most apparent and felt when I feel that I need to/have to make a decision. There is a center, a point of reference to evaluate options and make decisions and it feels that "I" am making decisions and better make the "right" decision. And finding the "right" decision brings with it all sorts of thoughts and feelings.

Have you heard of the Zen proverb: “Before enlightenment, chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood, carry water.” What do you think it means?

Yes, I've heard about it. I think it means that, from an outside perspective, things might look the same for someone observing the enlightened person. However, there will be changes from the perspective of the enlightened entity. In my experience, any step I took on this path changed my perceptions. It might look the same from the outside, but inside, it's very, very different.

Also, about loved ones, are they separate from you? Is there an “I” in each of them? How do you know that? Or is it assumed?

It's easy to assume there is an "I" in each of them as long as I believe there is an "I" inside of me.

so can you please describe this sense of “me”? You say that you see “something” (not nothing). Would you describe the body (aka sensations and colours) or anything else?

not sensations or colors, more like a feeling or a consistent thought, that has been the same in all my experiences, from childhood to now.

Does the sense of self have a location?

The closest I can say is "me" is inside my head. But when I look deeper, there is no body, it's just senses, I can't find a location for it

Does the sense of self have a shape or a size (different from the body)?

No shape or size

Does the sense of self say or communicate anything?

Doesn't say anything but communicate, to whom? if it communicates there should be something else that receives it. Does it communicate with itself?

If the answer is yes, how does the sense do this exactly?

I don't know, I do not know who is communicating with whom

Does the sense of self have any characteristics or attributes?

no attributes or characteristics, but then why does it have likes or dislikes? why does it get involved in some thoughts? I don't know

s there a sense of self in seeing, hearing, tasting?

There is a sense of self in connecting the seeing, hearing, and tasting together by putting itself in the center of them and making a story, a continuation

Where and when does the sense of self arise exactly?

It never stops, it's always on. Where? I don't know, it's everywhere

What is the sense of self ‘made of’? An image? Sound? Taste? Smell? Sensation? Thought? Is really a sense, or just a thought about it, a word (“self”)?

it's a combination of all senses + memory + center

What is found?

nothing, just the feeling of self

Also… What discerns it, distinguishes it, filters it out from "not me", etc.? The closest I can tell is what is perceived through senses is outside (what I hear, see, ...), what is perceiving them is me
If and when that sense of "me" arises, what creates and/or notices it?

Yeah, that's a question that I noticed above and don't know. The only possible answer is that it notices itself

When there is a sense of "me", and thus "not me" as well, look for what "in here" looks out at what is "out there" (i.e., "not me")?

"me" inside perceives signals, sights, sounds, etc out there

And having experienced a "me" your whole life: was it because you identified with an aspect of experience, or identified as an aspect of experience? Is/was there a difference between identifying with and identifying as something?

To me identifying with something means you know you're separate but identifying as something means there is no separation. With this definition, I have been identifying as a "me" my whole life


Thank you,
Shafigh

[poppyseed]

Hi Shafigh

I am not sure by "you" we mean the same thing, but I can't get over the fact that I don't exist. There is this being that I can't deny. Maybe that's the same "suchness" you mentioned a couple of posts ago. That never stopped existing, I can't stop existing. This "I" is not the same as my name or identity or even humanness, it's just that being without any form or shape or label.

It never stops, it's always on. Where? I don't know, it's everywhere

Let me remind you that we are inquiring into the self – an individual unit within a world with other units. We are not talking about existence in general. Obviously, there IS experiencing here - THIS. Whether experience will stop one day or not (aka "death") we don’t know, that would be an assumption/thinking about experiencing.

Focus on the feeling of am-ness/being, aliveness.
Can you tell if there is a being or just being?
Is life happening to a being or as being?
Is that “aliveness” any kind of object or subject? Is it even a human?
Is it what you've taken as "you"?

Furthermore, this “energy”/”being” - it could also be called aliveness, presence or I AM - even that is a label, is it not? Is there anything here that is not the senses?
Sensations would be physical, but there are also sensations when you close your eyes that don't have a location (unless there is just a mental image with eyes in the head). Even the experience of empty space (silence, spaciousness and nothingness) is still an experience (sensations) – a subtle experience (sensations) nonetheless but still experienceable. The way I look at sensations is that they include anything that is felt, such as touching a cup or a feeling of spaciousness. The feeling of expansiveness is a combination of sensations happening in quick succession, making it seem and feel expansive. However, it's good to remember that we can only experience see, hear, feel, taste, smell and thought. Anything not in the first five is thought.
This video might be helpful:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Lm3G0_ ... ex=17&t=8s

Yes, I've heard about it. I think it means that, from an outside perspective, things might look the same for someone observing the enlightened person. However, there will be changes from the perspective of the enlightened entity. In my experience, any step I took on this path changed my perceptions. It might look the same from the outside, but inside, it's very, very different.

Is there an “outside perspective” vs “inside” – where exactly is the border where inside becomes outside? Do thoughts have an owner – mine vs theirs? Where is the border that separates "mine" from "theirs"?

It's easy to assume there is an "I" in each of them as long as I believe there is an "I" inside of me.

As I made it clear from the beginning we are not interested in assumptions and stories – only looking what is here and what is not. So, do you actually see an “I” in others? How are “others” experienced in DE? Apply the “cup of coffee” break down to a person

Touching a friend’s hand, simply = ?
Hearing the friend talking, simply = ?
Smelling their perfume, simply = ?
Seeing their smile, simply = ?
Thinking about how good they look, simply = ?

not sensations or colors, more like a feeling or a consistent thought, that has been the same in all my experiences, from childhood to now.

OK, good! So the “me” is a thought then? You say not a sensation but feeling is about sensations. Is this thought yours? Are you its thinker? If you are not, can a thought think, see, smell, hear,…? Thoughts are built out of concepts/labels.
Does the label "I" contain an actual I...does it contain an actual person?
Does the label "I" itself, suggest in any way that it is an I?
Does the label "I" know anything about an I?
What does the label "I" point to? In other words, what does the word/label "I" actually refer to?

no attributes or characteristics, but then why does it have likes or dislikes? why does it get involved in some thoughts? I don't know

Are those your likes and dislikes? Are you the thinker of thoughts? Can you choose what to like and what not to? Where do you go to choose the thought about “likes” and where do you go to select the thoughts about “dislikes”? Are they arranged and grouped somewhere? OR these thoughts pop out just like any other thoughts, labelling what IS without a thinker, in a conditioned manner??

There is a sense of self in connecting the seeing, hearing, and tasting together by putting itself in the center of them and making a story, a continuation

it's a combination of all senses + memory + center

Where exactly is this center? Do hearing and seeing happen in different locations – to the left and to the right of the center? Do you see any borders between them, or they happen in the same “location-less place”?
Let explore seeing and “I” but you can do that with the other senses as well

Close your eyes.
With eyes closed, you will now experience 'blackness'. There may be other things you can find going on, sure. If you are looking at a bright light, there may be a red glow. There may be sparkly bits or cloudy flecks appearing and disappearing - It really doesn't matter about the specifics.
Just to make things simple, whatever you can see with eyes closed, I'm going to refer to it as 'black' or 'blackness' just for simplicity.
1) With eyes closed, can you confirm that what is experienced is 'blackness' as I mentioned?
2) Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than 'blackness'?
3) Can what is seeing/witnessing the blackness be found?
4) Can a pair of eyes, an 'I' / 'me'/Shafigh, a person be found that is witnessing the blackness? Or is there just 'blackness' to be found?
What do you find?
Can an INHERENT SEE-ER/observer/witness/I/Shafigh be found (described)?
Would anything that is suggested as the see-er, be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

Also what are memories? How are they different from “normal” thoughts?

"me" inside perceives signals, sights, sounds, etc out there

Is this really observed or is it an assumption? Remember we are interested only in observations here. That means you should be able to describe this entity that perceives and how exactly it does that – its characteristics. If it doesn’t have characteristics (cannot be described) what makes it different from a thought/abstraction? Furthermore, can a thought hear, see, smell, taste, or feel? Or just IS?

And having experienced a "me" your whole life: was it because you identified with an aspect of experience, or identified as an aspect of experience? Is/was there a difference between identifying with and identifying as something?

To me identifying with something means you know you're separate but identifying as something means there is no separation. With this definition, I have been identifying as a "me" my whole life

How did you identify as a “you”? The question was did “you” identify with experience (seeing, hearing,…) or you identified as experience (seeing, hearing, …)? Do you see the difference?

Yeah, that's a question that I noticed above and don't know. The only possible answer is that it notices itself

How does it do that, does it have a mirror? Or it sees itself as whatever is present - the senses?

The closest I can say is "me" is inside my head. But when I look deeper, there is no body, it's just senses, I can't find a location for it

We can look a bit more if you want…
Love
Rali

[bysa]

Hi Rali,

Can you tell if there is a being or just being?

That sense of existence or suchness is just being, there is nothing personal to it. But at the same time, unfortunately, there is a being, which is the source of all the suffering.
I'm going to answer your next questions from this separate sense of being.

Is life happening to a being or as being?

to a being

Is that “aliveness” any kind of object or subject? Is it even a human?

"aliveness" is not any object or subject. It is not a human. But my sense of being is a human

Is it what you've taken as "you"?

aliveness no, but my sense of being yes, that's what I'm taking as me

Furthermore, this “energy”/”being” - it could also be called aliveness, presence or I AM - even that is a label, is it not? Is there anything here that is not the senses?

When I close my eyes and sit in silence, I don't have any senses or thoughts but there is this aliveness, presence.


After answering this question, I read the next paragraph you wrote. you predicted what I'm going to say and answered that. It might be this subtle sensation, a sense of spaciousness

Is there an “outside perspective” vs “inside” – where exactly is the border where inside becomes outside? Do thoughts have an owner – mine vs theirs? Where is the border that separates "mine" from "theirs"?

Before I had some assumptions that I took as truth, now with the exercises we've done together, I'm not taking them as truth, but looking to see if they are really true or not. I am going to give you the first thing that comes to me and then what I find after looking.
Thoughts have owners, but when I look what I find is that they don't have owner but they are about me, and that's the border for "inside" and "outside". I don't have thoughts that are not about me. I believe others are the same, their thoughts are about them at the center.

As I made it clear from the beginning we are not interested in assumptions and stories – only looking what is here and what is not. So, do you actually see an “I” in others? How are “others” experienced in DE?

I don't see an "I" in others

Apply the “cup of coffee” break down to a person

Touching a friend’s hand, simply = sensation( feeling)
Hearing the friend talking, simply = sound (hearing)
Smelling their perfume, simply = smell (smelling)
Seeing their smile, simply = color (seeing)
Thinking about how good they look, simply = thoughts (thinking)

OK, good! So the “me” is a thought then? You say not a sensation but feeling is about sensations. Is this thought yours? Are you its thinker? If you are not, can a thought think, see, smell, hear,…?

The "me" is a thought, the thought is not mine, it's about me. No, a thought can't think, see, smell, ...

Does the label "I" contain an actual I...does it contain an actual person?

No

Does the label "I" itself, suggest in any way that it is an I?

No

Does the label "I" know anything about an I?

No

What does the label "I" point to? In other words, what does the word/label "I" actually refer to?

.............. nothing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Just marking this question, since it changed something)

Are those your likes and dislikes?

they are about me but I'm not the owner

Are you the thinker of thoughts?

No

Can you choose what to like and what not to?

No

Where do you go to choose the thought about “likes” and where do you go to select the thoughts about “dislikes”?

I don't go anywhere, I don't choose them. This is strange that it felt I was choosing

Are they arranged and grouped somewhere?

I don't know this

these thoughts pop out just like any other thoughts, labelling what IS without a thinker, in a conditioned manner??

Yes

Where exactly is this center? Do hearing and seeing happen in different locations – to the left and to the right of the center? Do you see any borders between them, or they happen in the same “location-less place”?

Can't find the center, all of them happen in the same "location-less place"

1) With eyes closed, can you confirm that what is experienced is 'blackness' as I mentioned?

Yes

2) Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than 'blackness'?

No

3) Can what is seeing/witnessing the blackness be found?

Nothing else can be seen, just thoughts about it

4) Can a pair of eyes, an 'I' / 'me'/Shafigh, a person be found that is witnessing the blackness? Or is there just 'blackness' to be found?

No

What do you find?

Just thoughts

Can an INHERENT SEE-ER/observer/witness/I/Shafigh be found (described)?
Would anything that is suggested as the see-er, be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

No, just an idea/thought

Also what are memories? How are they different from “normal” thoughts?

Memory is a type of thought, the difference is that it's not just a thought that pops up about me, it's about something that happened and others also observed it. like there is a picture of a vacation that actually happened that others see too. Memory is felt a type of more solid thought.

"me" inside perceives signals, sights, sounds, etc out there
Is this really observed or is it an assumption? Remember we are interested only in observations here. That means you should be able to describe this entity that perceives and how exactly it does that – its characteristics. If it doesn’t have characteristics (cannot be described) what makes it different from a thought/abstraction? Furthermore, can a thought hear, see, smell, taste, or feel? Or just IS?

Just an assumption, another thought that cannot hear, see, ... . It just IS.

The question was did “you” identify with experience (seeing, hearing,…) or you identified as experience (seeing, hearing, …)? Do you see the difference?

I identified with experience, and always thought of myself separate entity that life happens to.

How does it do that, does it have a mirror? Or it sees itself as whatever is present - the senses?

That's just another thought really.


I read my answers to your questions in this post and noticed how I've changed from the beginning of this post to the end. I didn't modify the answers.

These past posts have been very illuminating and helpful. Thank you for being patient with me and going through my assumptions over and over.

Shafigh

[poppyseed]

Hi Shafigh

These past posts have been very illuminating and helpful. Thank you for being patient with me and going through my assumptions over and over.

It’s my pleasure :). I’m glad I could help ;)

I read my answers to your questions in this post and noticed how I've changed from the beginning of this post to the end. I didn't modify the answers.

Thank you for making it clear! I also saw the difference and I would have shown it as contradictory :)
I few of them I do want to poke a bit more

I don't have thoughts that are not about me.

The thought, “It is raining today “ or “this dog is big” are not about you. Thoughts are just descriptions/labelling of what IS. Even “I” is a label as you saw and there is nothing wrong with it as long as its empty nature is seen. It’s just language. Some languages are closer to DE as they don’t need a pronoun - the verb form is enough.
Here is an exercise that illustrates this:
For the first ten minutes write down what you are experiencing right now using the word “I”.
For example:
I am sitting on a chair,
I am hearing a clock ticking,
I am looking at a computer screen,
I am feeling hungry.
Get right to the point, no past or future fantasy, just a plain description of your experience right here and now. LOOK what is happening in DE

Then for the next ten minutes continue writing down what you are experiencing but this time without using the word “I”. Just describe the experience as it is happening using verbs. (do not just rewrite your descriptions but what is here now)
For example:
Sitting on a chair,
typing,
breathing,
blinking.
At the end of the twenty minutes compare the two ways in which the experience was labelled and answer the following four questions:
1. Is one truer than the other, and If so, which one?
2. What is here without labels?
3. Do labels affect the experience or just describe it?
``

I believe others are the same, their thoughts are about them at the center

The key point here is “believe”. How can you know what thoughts “others” have? Even when you hear “someone” expressing supposedly their thoughts, in DE there is just hearing (sound) and thinking (“your” interpretation of that sound/thought or label). Do you see how funny it is? When I say a few words, they land in the listener. The listener takes on board a meaning from those words, so the words are interpreted and seen through filters of beliefs. The same words can mean different things to different people or different things in different situations. It is not up to the speaker where their words land. That’s relatively speaking. In DE there are no others as there is no I – just seeing_hearing_smelling_tasting_feeling_thinking – indivisible THIS.
Furthermore, does the sound (i.e. “their voice”) have any objects in it, or persons? If I just say “apple”, can you really touch an “apple”? If I describe what sour soap (a local fruit) taste like and smells like, would you be able to smell it and taste it? You can certainly try to imagine but it will be exactly like thinking of chocolate and actually eating it – the raw rich experience is just not there.

Ok so let’s inquire into the idea of choice and decision making as this is also where you seem to have a lot of assumptions ...
Please explore the exercises below and report your findings! Remember that we’re looking for some kind of entity, a something, an ‘I’ which is doing the ‘choosing’. Sometimes we describe this sense of choosing as a ‘feeling’: It feels like ‘I’ did the ‘choosing’, but remember we are not interested in “seems like” and “feels like” entities, but ones that could be described.

1. Hold a hand in front of you; palm turned down. Now turn the palm up. And down...and up and so on.

How is the movement controlled?
Does a thought control it?
Can a ‘controller’ or and entity that is choosing be located?
How is the decision made to turn the hand over? Track any decision point when a thought MADE THE DECISION to turn the hand over.

2. Put two objects that you like in front of you (e.g. a cup of coffee and a glass of juice)

Step1. Look at drink A and at drink B. Think about their respective qualities, the things you like about them, compare and weigh the pros and cons of each. See if a preference is manifesting for one or the other.
Step2. Count to 5.
Step3. Choose one of the drinks. Pick it up and take a sip.

In step 1 when thinking about their respective qualities, did you ‘choose’ the qualities? Or did they kind of appear by themselves? If some preferences manifested, did you ‘choose’ these preferences? Or did they just pop up by themselves?

In step 2 when you counted to 5, if the preferences took the back seat while the numbers took the front seat, did you ‘choose’ this sequence of event? Did you ‘choose’ to shut down the preferences to give way to the counting? Did you directly experience an entity doing the ‘choosing’?

In step 3 where you made a choice, did anything arise that announced, ‘I am the chooser’? If so, what does it look like?
Remember no “feels like” or “seems like” ‘I’ did the ‘choosing’.
Can feeling choose? Can seeing choose?

3. Please take me through a biggish decision that you made recently - not something very personal so you are able to share more details about your decision making. Something like planning a holiday or buying a car...

How did it come to be? Consider all of the conditions that were necessary for it to happen. If any one of those conditions were different, would the outcome have been the same? How many of these conditions were outside of your influence? What was in your control (according to thought)?

Please take your time with each exercise! Repeat as many times as you need and then write the answers for all of them. Watch like a hawk. Don't go to thoughts, examine the actual experience. Do this as many times as you like, and each time inquire with the questions.

Love
Rali

[bysa]

Hi Rali,

Here is an exercise that illustrates this:
For the first ten minutes write down what you are experiencing right now using the word “I”.

I am thinking about this sentence
I am observing my thoughts
I am listening to the music
I am moving my feet
I am typing on the keyboard
I am thinking about my next words
I am thinking about my plans later today
I am looking at the screen
I am feeling hot
I am thirsty
I am drinking water
I am noticing there is a lot going on that just happens automatically without my narration
I am noticing how unmaintainable is this process of always noticing experience
I am grateful that most of the experience goes unnoticed by my mind
I am noticing there are a lot happening without me thinking about them, deciding
I am noticing the breath
I am noticing my heartbeat
I am hearing the hum of the fan
I am seeing out the window
I am going to stop this, it's too much

Then for the next ten minutes continue writing down what you are experiencing but this time without using the word “I”. Just describe the experience as it is happening using verbs. (do not just rewrite your descriptions but what is here now)

listening to music
breathing
thinking
sitting on a chair
drinking water
seeing outside

closing the eyes

1. Is one truer than the other, and If so, which one?

no, they're the same

2. What is here without labels?

sensations: seeing, hearing, touching, ...

3. Do labels affect the experience or just describe it?

No, they don't, they just describe it

The key point here is “believe”. How can you know what thoughts “others” have?

I can't, just making assumptions based on my interpretation of that sound

does the sound (i.e. “their voice”) have any objects in it, or persons? If I just say “apple”, can you really touch an “apple”? If I describe what sour soap (a local fruit) taste like and smells like, would you be able to smell it and taste it?

No it doesn't have any objects in it, just an idea, label that thoughts form based on what is heard



1. Hold a hand in front of you; palm turned down. Now turn the palm up. And down...and up and so on.

How is the movement controlled?

a thought pops up to turn the palm and the body does it

Does a thought control it?

intention/wanting/thought

Can a ‘controller’ or and entity that is choosing be located?

No

How is the decision made to turn the hand over?

Your asking, brought up thoughts that end up moving the hand, I don't know what the main controller is, your question, thought, or something else. I can't track a decision point when a thought made the decision. There was no decision, the decision was made and I just noticed that. hmmmm interesting. I can't find any decision point in any of my decisions. I just noticed what to choose. This is strange.



2. Put two objects that you like in front of you (e.g. a cup of coffee and a glass of juice)

In step 1 when thinking about their respective qualities, did you ‘choose’ the qualities? Or did they kind of appear by themselves?

The qualities appear by themselves

If some preferences manifested, did you ‘choose’ these preferences? Or did they just pop up by themselves?

No preferences manifested. I tried with two different objects and preferences appeared but I don't know where these preferences come from

In step 2 when you counted to 5, if the preferences took the back seat while the numbers took the front seat, did you ‘choose’ this sequence of event? Did you ‘choose’ to shut down the preferences to give way to the counting? Did you directly experience an entity doing the ‘choosing’?

Didn't experience an entity doing the choosing

In step 3 where you made a choice, did anything arise that announced, ‘I am the chooser’? If so, what does it look like?

No chooser entity

Can feeling choose? Can seeing choose?

No

3. Please take me through a biggish decision that you made recently - not something very personal so you are able to share more details about your decision-making. Something like planning a holiday or buying a car...

We recently planned a holiday to Europe, which involved making several decisions in a short period of time. We had to decide where to go, how long to stay, the time of year, our budget, where to fly in and out, where to stay, whether to rent a car, and whether to travel between cities by flight or train. Some decisions were easy because we knew what we wanted and there were obvious good choices available. However, other decisions were more difficult due to limited options, many unknowns, no strong preferences, or conflicting preferences.

How did it come to be? Consider all of the conditions that were necessary for it to happen. If any one of those conditions were different, would the outcome have been the same?

100%

How many of these conditions were outside of your influence? What was in your control (according to thought)?

None of the decisions were entirely in our control. Some factors, like the available options, were obviously beyond our control from the start. Others, like deciding when to go, seemed within our control at first glance but were actually influenced by conditions like weather, vacation time, and other life events, that are beyond our control. It all depends on how many levels deep you are willing to look. One factor that seems hidden deeper is that considering more options and allocating more time for research was within my control.


I was somewhat aware of the illusion of free will and the idea of a chooser/thinker, and these exercises have made it clearer to me. The sticky part is my expectation that if there is no chooser and choices are being made, then decision-making should be easy. I thought I should just open myself, be receptive, and the right choice would show up, communicated to me in some way, and I would follow. That's my definition of flowing with life—being in the zone, in a flow state where things happen frictionlessly, just going with life without any sense of separation.

However, my experience is different. There is doubt and confusion about whether I'm making the right decision, whether I should consider more options, whether I will regret this choice, and what if it doesn't turn out to be a good decision.


Thank you,
Shafigh

[poppyseed]

Hi Shafigh
Please don't forget to give me a break down of a daily activity. It's one way to insure looking is happening on a daily basis :)

a thought pops up to turn the palm and the body does it

What is a “body” again in DE and does it do stuff? Can sensations labelled “body”do stuff or they just are? Can sensations see, hear, taste, smell, or think? Can thoughts do stuff – tell (speak) sensations what and when to happen? Are sensations aware of thoughts?
Do sensations know anything?
Do sensations understand English? Or any other language?
Do sensations know whatever is seen?
Are the senses and thoughts doers? Is there doing at all or just a story about doing?

None of the decisions were entirely in our control. Some factors, like the available options, were obviously beyond our control from the start. Others, like deciding when to go, seemed within our control at first glance but were actually influenced by conditions like weather, vacation time, and other life events, that are beyond our control. It all depends on how many levels deep you are willing to look. One factor that seems hidden deeper is that considering more options and allocating more time for research was within my control.

I just wanted an example of a decision that you would normally consider that you’ve made. The point was to look entirely in thought content where cause and effect “live” and see that even there there’s no “you” making a decision. It was just one event leading to another, leading to another, with “actions” based on previous conditioning, dating back to “before you were born”. Even "research of options" is conditioned - what and where you would look, what will speak pro and against. The thought “decision is made” is layered on top of other thoughts/beliefs/descriptions of what has happened before.
However... Why does the wind blow? It just blows. Yes we can say it happens as a result of previous events but there’s no entity “wind” that does the blowing. There is no wind that decides to blow. It’s just language. What is “moving of the hands” in DE? We’ve seen that it’s just a sensation, labelled “hands moving” + colour/shape labelled “hands moving”. So, what makes the sensations to appear? What makes seeing to appear? LOOK! Is there anything that causes anything to appear? Do cause and effect exist outside of thought content? Thought comes to describe that things are happening and why they are happening, but in DE things are just happening - THIS. Is the description/explanation/label needed for things to happen?
Here is a video that you might find interesting:
https://vimeo.com/90101368?fbclid=IwAR3
Even the separation of THIS into seeing, hearing, smelling,… is done only through labelling. You saw already there are no borders between them. To say that something depends on something else, starts with defining “something” to exist inherently and then observe it how it interacts with other defined inherently existing “somethings”. But can you really cut something out of the whole? Can you cut the bird out of the sky (the background)? Remember the “world” is built of concepts not of real “things” (e.g. apples).

With the senses we can see that we don’t experience them individually. Rather, these are different aspects of experience. Thought tells us that our senses are separate streams of information. We see with our eyes, hear with our ears, feel with our skin, smell with our nose, taste with our tongue. In DE, though, it is seen as a one experience. Senses "affect" each other. Although speech is perceived through the ears, what we see can change what we hear. In this video, a man produces the same syllable over and over again. If you watch his mouth, you’ll hear the syllable “fah,” but if you look away, you’ll hear “bah.” Although your ears hear “bah,” your eyes see “fah”. This phenomenon is known as the McGurk effect. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k8fHR9jKVM )

Another example of sensory interaction is how both taste and smell are vital for savouring food (flavour). If smell is lost or impaired, for instance, the taste of food will also be impaired, even if taste receptors on the tongue are working fine.
Here is a fun video that demonstrates how a relationship between sight and touch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DphlhmtGRqI

So even the senses are not inherently existing (on their own). It is just labels/definitions that make them appear so. Can you see that?

I was somewhat aware of the illusion of free will and the idea of a chooser/thinker, and these exercises have made it clearer to me. The sticky part is my expectation that if there is no chooser and choices are being made, then decision-making should be easy. I thought I should just open myself, be receptive, and the right choice would show up, communicated to me in some way, and I would follow. That's my definition of flowing with life—being in the zone, in a flow state where things happen frictionlessly, just going with life without any sense of separation.

However, my experience is different. There is doubt and confusion about whether I'm making the right decision, whether I should consider more options, whether I will regret this choice, and what if it doesn't turn out to be a good decision.

Is there decision making at all? Can you see the story of difficult or easy decisions layered on top of what IS already happening? Also why should “decision- making”, aka thought story, be different? It’s not that there was a decision-maker (i.e. thinker) before and now it got fired. There never was – it was just an illusion. Have seen the illusion of a Kanitza triangle


If you are asking why does the story around what IS is not changing , that is a different story (pun intended). Stories don’t change on the spot once the major illusion (i.e. no self) is seen. It can take time to go through all the stories. We look at the major ones but there are so many others that make “you” that need to be seen for what they are – an illusion/a fairy tale/fiction. The good thing is that because thoughts are self-organising, this thing happens on its own. Once the core of beliefs is changed the others begin coming to the light to be seen into this new context, seen by no one.

This is why I asked you to approach this inquiry with a “beginner’s mind”, Expectations come in the way of seeing this moment as it is. Are expectations (i.e. thoughts) even useful? Are they your expectations (i.e. are you their thinker)? They try to predict what the future should be like if this and this happens based on memories (i.e. thoughts) about past experiences and new information/teachings (i.e. more thoughts). We can inquire into time – past, present, future – if you want

Love
Rali