Seeking no self

Welcome to the main forum. When you are ready to start a conversation, register and once your application is processed a guide will come to talk to you.
This is one-on-one style forum, one thread per green member.
User avatar
warissem
Posts: 268
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Seeking no self

Postby warissem » Wed Sep 02, 2020 11:23 am

Hi Bobs
No, I wasn't sitting. You assumed that. I was walking-- half the day, just for this exercise. Even though you suggested 10 minutes, I didn't feel complete with my answer after 10 minutes-- and after an hour--- and after 2 hours-- so I just kept walking until 5:45 pm. I actually canceled an appointment to keep walking.
I said that because you said :”I think I am walking”, “when I say walking is happening”, “when I say I hear” . You know that the verbs “think” and “say” relate to thinking not to direct experience. It is better to say When I was walking, when I was hearing, … Forget about it.
I have a tough time with this one. You say the 'I' is a belief. It feels as real as anything to me. I look- and look, and look, and it is still there.

You said “it feels real as anything to me”. You used the verb “feel” then it is a thought. LOOKING does not mean look at your thoughts but it means looking with eyes open, ears open and all other senses open (smell, taste, touch). When you look at something, you can describe it (shape, color, size, …). Let’s be definitely clear about LOOKING. When something can be known through the five senses, it is direct experience (that’s what we are about here). When something is not known through the five senses, it is a thought, a belief, imagination, …

Right now, take a look to this “me” through direct experience, through the five senses without leaning on thoughts, beliefs, memories. LOOK and write back what you see.

I don't know why you say only sensations are behind the eyes. How do you know? If it is true, then yes, the I is a sensation. Just like love, or anger. They are only sensations. Maybe we have inadequate language to express them. But they are real, just as 'I' is real.

Love, anger are not sensations, these are feelings. A sensation is something perceived through the sense organs (the 5 senses). The sensation behind the eyes is a tingling. It is like the sensation you see right now in your toes, in your legs, in your eyelids or in your chest.

Yes sensations are real but “I” is not real, it does not exist outside of thought. There is this aliveness but it is not you.
I sat for a few minutes to watch this. I noticed that there was an itch in my eye and a finger moved up to scratch it. There was no planning, or a thought "well, it looks like the eye is itching so I'd better send a finger up there to scratch it." So in that act there was no I.
Look at this “I” which seems to do a lot of things (think, decide, give orders, move fingers, …). Look with your 5 senses open and write back what you SEE not what you feel nor what you think.

Is there an “I” sending a finger to scratch the eye ?
But then I thought “ I wonder if I can willfully move my finger.” So So I did. And THAT act was directed by an I.

Did you think or the thought “ I wonder if I can willfully move my finger.” arises from nowhere ?

Can you know a thought before it arises? LOOK at how thoughts are arising and tell me if you can choose what the next thought will be ?


Once again, I devoted quite a while to this. I was not happy with my answers after 10, or 30 minutes. Is there 'I' walking? For the first few minutes, yes. And the I was constantly complaining "Why do I have to do this? I don't want to do this. There are better things I could be doing." I was noticing birds chirping in the background, and insects moving, but there was still an I in the foreground. Then at one point there was some pretty music coming out of a house. I went into a pleasant daydream, and forgot where I was. A few minutes later the sense of I returned, and with it its burden of complaining and problems. I asked of each sense: is it going on without me? During the daydreaming time the sight, sound, taste, touch, and smell were going on without what I call me. After that it was the 'me' that was noticing them.
A few times during my walk I stopped and talked with neighbors and friends. In conversation I was watching the I. It was active during each encounter.

You have written a lot of things here : do this exercise. There is a list of what you said : make a choice and mark them like this : direct experience (DE) or thought (T).

Is there I walking? yes T
I was complaining
Birds chirping
Insects moving DE
Still an I in the foreground
Music coming
Pleasant daydream
Sense of I returned
Me noticing them
Talked with neighbors
Watching the I, it was active

I give you an example : I am walking is a thought (T). The “I” cannot walk. You can see that all animals are walking without an “I” doing it. It is the same for the humans. Insects moving : it is direct experience (DE) because insects are seen through through your eyes and heard through your hears. Can you see definitively the difference between direct experience and thought?
I am seated on a wooden chair. I feel the hard wood under my body. I have a slightly sweet taste in my mouth from the tea I drank a few minutes ago. I notice that the temperature is rather pleasant. I feel these fingers lightly touching the keyboard. I can hear cars outside. Very far away someone is playing the piano, it sounds beautiful. I notice a smudge of dust or something in the lens of my glasses. I feel my back itching; then I feel it being relieved as my hand goes back to scratch it. I feel the hard floor underneath my feet. A very heavy truck just went by, making a lot of noise. I can smell the faint scent of jasmine blossoms outside. Now a gardener somewhere is using a leaf blower, quite loudly. I feel my right foot move up to caress a cold spot on my left thigh. The left thigh feels good from the touch, and the right foot also feels good from the coldness of the skin of the thigh. I notice the hum of the electric wires outside. Hmmm... someone in the neighborhood is making fresh coffee; I can smell it. My nose has a slight itch and I scratch it.
Great, that the first time you come up with direct experience, you gave a picture of what is going on, very nice observations. Now can you write the same text without using “I” and write back with what comes up

Give an answer to each question written in blue and do the exercise.

You are not too far, best wishes

Warissem

User avatar
BobS
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2020 7:08 am

Re: Seeking no self

Postby BobS » Fri Sep 04, 2020 3:40 am

Hi Warissem,

Thanks for your patience!
Right now, take a look to this “me” through direct experience, through the five senses without leaning on thoughts, beliefs, memories. LOOK and write back what you see.
I cannot truly see a 'me' through the five senses. I went through each, one by one. But the me is still there. Is it just a thought? Could be, but it's a permanent thought.
There is this aliveness but it is not you.
This resonates with me. or at least the word aliveness does. Aliveness is a way to describe me.
Look with your 5 senses open and write back what you SEE not what you feel nor what you think.

Is there an “I” sending a finger to scratch the eye ?
No, I can't see, hear, touch, taste, or smell an 'I'. I don't find an "I" sending a finger to touch the eye.

Did you think or the thought “ I wonder if I can willfully move my finger.” arises from nowhere ?

Can you know a thought before it arises? LOOK at how thoughts are arising and tell me if you can choose what the next thought will be ?
Arise from nowhere? It arose from in my head. No, I can't know a thought before it arises. I can't choose what the next will be.
You have written a lot of things here : do this exercise. There is a list of what you said : make a choice and mark them like this : direct experience (DE) or thought (T).

Is there I walking? yes T
I was complaining
Birds chirping
Insects moving DE
Still an I in the foreground
Music coming
Pleasant daydream
Sense of I returned
Me noticing them
Talked with neighbors
Watching the I, it was active
Is there I walking? T
I was complaining T
Birds chirping DE
Insects moving DE
Still an I in the foreground T
Music coming DE
Pleasant Daydream T
Sense of I returned T
Me noticing them T
talked with neighbors T
Watching the I it was active T

Body being seated on a wooden chair. Hard wood felt under body. Slightly sweet taste in a mouth from the tea. Temperature is rather pleasant. Fingers lightly touching the keyboard. cars heard outside. Very far away someone is playing the piano, it sounds beautiful. A smudge of dust or something in the lens of my glasses. Back itching; then being relieved as my hand goes back to scratch it. Hard floor underneath my feet. A very heavy truck just went by, making a lot of noise.The faint scent of jasmine blossoms outside. Now a gardener somewhere is using a leaf blower, quite loudly. My right foot move up to caress a cold spot on my left thigh. The left thigh feels good from the touch, and the right foot also feels good from the coldness of the skin of the thigh. There is the hum of the electric wires outside. Hmmm... someone in the neighborhood is making fresh coffee; it smells good. My nose has a slight itch and it gets scratched.

User avatar
warissem
Posts: 268
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Seeking no self

Postby warissem » Fri Sep 04, 2020 10:36 am

Hi Bobs
I cannot truly see a 'me' through the five senses. I went through each, one by one. But the me is still there. Is it just a thought? Could be, but it's a permanent thought.
Yes it could be a permanent thought. Is that which is seeing thoughts, a thought ? LOOK.

This resonates with me. or at least the word aliveness does. Aliveness is a way to describe me.
Yes but aliveness is not you, it just is.

No, I can't see, hear, touch, taste, or smell an 'I'. I don't find an "I" sending a finger to touch the eye.
Good observation

Arise from nowhere? It arose from in my head.

You know definitely that thoughts are arising without you but you are still believing that they do so from your head; In direct experience, with your five senses, have you ever seen a thought arise from your head?

No, I can't know a thought before it arises. I can't choose what the next will be.
Good

About the exercise, you have done a good work, you really make a difference between a thought and direct experience.

About the text to write without using “I” you have done it good but you have not written back your impressions. You can conclude that the picture is given with using “I” or without using it.


What comes up when it is read that there is absolutely no “you” in any way, shape or form, there never has been a “you”, nor is there or will be there ever be?

Give answers to all the questions in italics.

Best wishes, Warissem

User avatar
warissem
Posts: 268
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Seeking no self

Postby warissem » Fri Sep 04, 2020 10:36 am

Hi Bobs
I cannot truly see a 'me' through the five senses. I went through each, one by one. But the me is still there. Is it just a thought? Could be, but it's a permanent thought.
Yes it could be a permanent thought. Is that which is seeing thoughts, a thought ? LOOK.

This resonates with me. or at least the word aliveness does. Aliveness is a way to describe me.
Yes but aliveness is not you, it just is.

No, I can't see, hear, touch, taste, or smell an 'I'. I don't find an "I" sending a finger to touch the eye.
Good observation

Arise from nowhere? It arose from in my head.

You know definitely that thoughts are arising without you but you are still believing that they do so from your head; In direct experience, with your five senses, have you ever seen a thought arise from your head?

No, I can't know a thought before it arises. I can't choose what the next will be.
Good

About the exercise, you have done a good work, you really make a difference between a thought and direct experience.

About the text to write without using “I” you have done it good but you have not written back your impressions. You can conclude that the picture is given with using “I” or without using it.


What comes up when it is read that there is absolutely no “you” in any way, shape or form, there never has been a “you”, nor is there or will be there ever be?

Give answers to all the questions in italics.

Best wishes, Warissem

User avatar
warissem
Posts: 268
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Seeking no self

Postby warissem » Fri Sep 04, 2020 10:36 am

Hi Bobs
I cannot truly see a 'me' through the five senses. I went through each, one by one. But the me is still there. Is it just a thought? Could be, but it's a permanent thought.
Yes it could be a permanent thought. Is that which is seeing thoughts, a thought ? LOOK.

This resonates with me. or at least the word aliveness does. Aliveness is a way to describe me.
Yes but aliveness is not you, it just is.

No, I can't see, hear, touch, taste, or smell an 'I'. I don't find an "I" sending a finger to touch the eye.
Good observation

Arise from nowhere? It arose from in my head.

You know definitely that thoughts are arising without you but you are still believing that they do so from your head; In direct experience, with your five senses, have you ever seen a thought arise from your head?

No, I can't know a thought before it arises. I can't choose what the next will be.
Good

About the exercise, you have done a good work, you really make a difference between a thought and direct experience.

About the text to write without using “I” you have done it good but you have not written back your impressions. You can conclude that the picture is given with using “I” or without using it.


What comes up when it is read that there is absolutely no “you” in any way, shape or form, there never has been a “you”, nor is there or will be there ever be?

Give answers to all the questions in italics.

Best wishes, Warissem

User avatar
warissem
Posts: 268
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Seeking no self

Postby warissem » Fri Sep 04, 2020 10:36 am

Hi Bobs
I cannot truly see a 'me' through the five senses. I went through each, one by one. But the me is still there. Is it just a thought? Could be, but it's a permanent thought.
Yes it could be a permanent thought. Is that which is seeing thoughts, a thought ? LOOK.

This resonates with me. or at least the word aliveness does. Aliveness is a way to describe me.
Yes but aliveness is not you, it just is.

No, I can't see, hear, touch, taste, or smell an 'I'. I don't find an "I" sending a finger to touch the eye.
Good observation

Arise from nowhere? It arose from in my head.

You know definitely that thoughts are arising without you but you are still believing that they do so from your head; In direct experience, with your five senses, have you ever seen a thought arise from your head?

No, I can't know a thought before it arises. I can't choose what the next will be.
Good

About the exercise, you have done a good work, you really make a difference between a thought and direct experience.

About the text to write without using “I” you have done it good but you have not written back your impressions. You can conclude that the picture is given with using “I” or without using it.


What comes up when it is read that there is absolutely no “you” in any way, shape or form, there never has been a “you”, nor is there or will be there ever be?

Give answers to all the questions in italics.

Best wishes, Warissem

User avatar
BobS
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2020 7:08 am

Re: Seeking no self

Postby BobS » Fri Sep 04, 2020 8:57 pm

Is that which is seeing thoughts, a thought ? LOOK.
Yes, it is a thought.
In direct experience, with your five senses, have you ever seen a thought arise from your head?
No.
What comes up when it is read that there is absolutely no “you” in any way, shape or form, there never has been a “you”, nor is there or will be there ever be?
I have read this hundreds of time in Nondual literature, from all the teachers, and many gurus on Youtube. As well as in LU Forums and in Gateless Gatecrashers book. But it's not my experience. I read it over and over again and I don't feel its Truth.

User avatar
warissem
Posts: 268
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Seeking no self

Postby warissem » Sat Sep 05, 2020 9:36 am

Hi Bobs

I thought that you have really making difference between a thought and direct experience but now I have a doubt after reading your last post.

1) If you have seen that a thought can do anything, how can you say that what is seeing thoughts is a thought?

2) When I asked this question :"What comes up when it is read that there is absolutely no “you” in any way, shape or form, there never has been a “you”, nor is there or will be there ever be?" your answer is similar to the answer of the beginning of this dialog when you said :
I have read this hundreds of time in Nondual literature, from all the teachers, and many gurus on Youtube. As well as in LU Forums and in Gateless Gatecrashers book. But it's not my experience. I read it over and over again and I don't feel its Truth.
You don't recognize the experience of no you. I said in the first post that you have resistance to look, to let go this "you", this identification. If you are comfortable with this identification, it is OK. If you want really to get rid of this identification, you need to make the effort to look for yourself and do the exercises as I said in direct experience not imagining the exercises and giving right answers. It is not an examination, there is no notation no A, no A+, no B. It is up to you to do the best to see what is going on. I noticed that you have the ability to look at "what is" and make description in the now through the five senses. Then if you want to go ahead, look at That which is knowing thoughts and write back what you have seen.

Whatever is done, look at that which is looking, which is observing, which is knowing experiences : if you say "me", you have concluded that "me" is a thought and you have seen that a thought cannot see, then what is looking? You have to do this exercise till you see it. It could take a day, two days or a week. There is no urge.

Best wishes, Warissem

User avatar
BobS
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2020 7:08 am

Re: Seeking no self

Postby BobS » Mon Sep 07, 2020 2:29 am

You don't recognize the experience of no you. I said in the first post that you have resistance to look, to let go this "you", this identification.
I cannot find this resistance to look, to let go of this identification. I have gone to retreats in India and meditated for days, where the guru told us to look for you. At no point did I say "Look, Swami, I really don't want to look for you. I have resistance to that." You could, of course, say that my resistance is subconscious. In that case I just can't find it.
If you want really to get rid of this identification, you need to make the effort to look for yourself and do the exercises as I said in direct experience not imagining the exercises and giving right answers.
I don't know if it's quite exact to say that I "want really to get rid of this identification". It's more that I want to know the truth. Is the "I" real or not? I don't want to take someone's word for it, even though I respect all the LU guides and people throughout the centuries who've claimed there is no 'I'. I want to know for myself.
look at That which is knowing thoughts and write back what you have seen.
The thoughts appear out of nowhere. They are recognized by an aliveness which I call me. It is real. I have no idea if it is a thought, a sensation, a feeling or what. When I close my eyes, and get very quiet, it is there. I think some might call it 'sense of being'.

User avatar
warissem
Posts: 268
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Seeking no self

Postby warissem » Mon Sep 07, 2020 1:23 pm

Hi Bobs
The thoughts appear out of nowhere. They are recognized by an aliveness which I call me. It is real. I have no idea if it is a thought, a sensation, a feeling or what. When I close my eyes, and get very quiet, it is there. I think some might call it 'sense of being'.
Yes the thoughts are recognized. What is aliveness : "a property of being animated, having an animal life". In the light of this definition can aliveness recognizes thoughts ? Can you see that "me" is added as a thought upon aliveness? Yes aliveness is real whatever you call it.

Yes there is a sense of being, aliveness. You are sitting in front of the screen : there is seeing of the screen. Does it need a you ?
There is reading and understanding these words : does it need a you ?
There are thoughts arising : does it need a you ?

Would you describeTHAT which knows appearances and thoughts in direct experience (using the five senses).

Warissem

User avatar
BobS
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2020 7:08 am

Re: Seeking no self

Postby BobS » Mon Sep 07, 2020 9:50 pm

Can you see that "me" is added as a thought upon aliveness?
I am trying really hard to see this, but even after dropping opinion and thought and just LOOKING I don't see that the 'me' is added. The Aliveness is there, and it makes things happen. I suspect this is the heart of the matter; people who see that the self is not real can see this, and those who cannot see this think the self is real.
You are sitting in front of the screen : there is seeing of the screen. Does it need a you ?
Yes, it needs a you. If there is no you (me) then there are just meaningless words and pictures on a screen. The 'me' is what converts those pixels into meaning. I see a happy picture on the screen. I feel glad. I see a sad picture, I get sad. I know people in Nonduality say "Good and bad feelings happen, but to no one." I don't see that. They happen to a me.
There is reading and understanding these words : does it need a you ?
Yes, how can there be understanding without a you? It makes no sense to say "words are understood-- by no one".
There are thoughts arising : does it need a you ?
This one is different. I can see how thoughts can arise without a you.
Would you describeTHAT which knows appearances and thoughts in direct experience (using the five senses).
This is really hard for me. I've sat here for an hour trying to answer it. One thing I DO know is that it cannot be described by the 5 senses. Those are for things OUTSIDE my head. But it's still there! I keep trying to describe it and what I come up with is the word Center. There is a center inside me which knows appearances and thoughts in direct experience. But that's just another word. No word can adequately explain it. So I can't describe it, but does that mean it's not there? No. It seems absurd to say it's not there.

User avatar
warissem
Posts: 268
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Seeking no self

Postby warissem » Tue Sep 08, 2020 1:06 pm

Hi Bobs
I am trying really hard to see this, but even after dropping opinion and thought and just LOOKING I don't see that the 'me' is added. The Aliveness is there, and it makes things happen. I suspect this is the heart of the matter; people who see that the self is not real can see this, and those who cannot see this think the self is real.

What is written above is only about thoughts. You are not describing direct experience. It is so simple : there is knowing of what is called an alive body and there are thoughts about me, you or whatever. Do you see or smell a “me” put on this alive body ? If so describe it : color, shape, form, size, smell of it, taste of it, its texture, …

Yes, it needs a you. If there is no you (me) then there are just meaningless words and pictures on a screen. The 'me' is what converts those pixels into meaning. I see a happy picture on the screen. I feel glad. I see a sad picture, I get sad. I know people in Nonduality say "Good and bad feelings happen, but to no one." I don't see that. They happen to a me.
All what you said are thoughts. I said it a lot of times, LOOKING is reporting from direct experience (seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching or sensations), don’t go to thoughts.

Yes, how can there be understanding without a you? It makes no sense to say "words are understood-- by no one".

The understanding is taking place but it is not You understanding. Anyway what do you mean by “me” :

Is it an object ?
Is it a thought?
Is it a sensation ?
Or whatever : give details and describe it.


Please give your answers after having looked not from your mind.
This one is different. I can see how thoughts can arise without a you.
Aha, then what is knowing thoughts is different from the one which is reading and understanding. Would you describe both of them?
This is really hard for me. I've sat here for an hour trying to answer it. One thing I DO know is that it cannot be described by the 5 senses. Those are for things OUTSIDE my head. But it's still there! I keep trying to describe it and what I come up with is the word Center. There is a center inside me which knows appearances and thoughts in direct experience. But that's just another word. No word can adequately explain it. So I can't describe it, but does that mean it's not there? No. It seems absurd to say it's not there.

You see that there is no one there in direct experience and you don’t accept it. You are believing thoughts without a substance instead of believing what is in front of you, in plain view. That is why I asked in the first instance “ is there any resistance to look?” “are you afraid to lose control on something” “are you afraid to see that there is no you”. I can assure to you that there is no you right now in this very second when these words are read. Seeing no you, won’t change your life. It is seeing the fallacy of a separate self which exists only as a thought.

Best wishes, Warissem

User avatar
BobS
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2020 7:08 am

Re: Seeking no self

Postby BobS » Wed Sep 09, 2020 8:11 pm

Do you see or smell a “me” put on this alive body ? If so describe it : color, shape, form, size, smell of it, taste of it, its texture, …
No.
It seems to that it works like this: You have a rule that you believe wholeheartedly. You claim that if something cannot be perceived by color, shape, form, size, smell, taste, texture, then it doesn't exist. I'm not sure about that. So the fact that the 'I' cannot be perceived by the 5 senses is not evidence to me that it does not exist.

The understanding is taking place but it is not You understanding. Anyway what do you mean by “me” :

Is it an object ?
Is it a thought?
Is it a sensation ?
Or whatever : give details and describe it.
"The understanding is taking place but it is not You understanding." How can that be? Isn't a brain required to understand?
So for me the me is the brain. I know you will say "that is a thought" and maybe you're right. But I can sense my experience coming from a Center in the area where my brain is. It is more real to me than sight, sound, smell, taste, touch. Because if I close my eyes, be still and dismiss all thought, and make sure that I am not seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, or smelling anything, I still have this sense of existence. There is still an 'I' even if it is not doing anything or sensing anything.
Aha, then what is knowing thoughts is different from the one which is reading and understanding. Would you describe both of them?
This one will keep me up all night! I'm going to have to wait.
You see that there is no one there in direct experience and you don’t accept it.
Does that describe my experience? No, when I repeat the phrase "I see that there is no one there in direct experience" I have to admit that is not my truth.

You are believing thoughts without a substance instead of believing what is in front of you, in plain view.
WHAT is in front of me, in plain view?
That is why I asked in the first instance “ is there any resistance to look?” “are you afraid to lose control on something” “are you afraid to see that there is no you”.

I can't see why anyone would have resistance to look.

User avatar
warissem
Posts: 268
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Seeking no self

Postby warissem » Thu Sep 10, 2020 6:00 pm

Hi Bobs
No.
It seems to that it works like this: You have a rule that you believe wholeheartedly. You claim that if something cannot be perceived by color, shape, form, size, smell, taste, texture, then it doesn't exist. I'm not sure about that. So the fact that the 'I' cannot be perceived by the 5 senses is not evidence to me that it does not exist.

Yes this is the rule in this forum : looking at direct experience. There are also thoughts known but there is of no interest here to go to what are thoughts about. In the beginning of this dialog we have given some rules like forgetting all about what you know about spirituality, religion, advaita or whatever. It is necessary to find for yourself what is going on here. There is a need for you to give faith to the process and answer the questions after having looked, not from the memory.

You said : “the fact that the 'I' cannot be perceived by the 5 senses is not evidence to me that it does not exist.” You have seen that “I” does not exist through the five senses. It is a fact. Then this fact is covered by a thought which is “not the evidence to me that it does not exist”. Does this thought prove the existence of a you? Right now, a thought of a unicorn is seen, does it prove its existence?


Exercise to do : imagine a fruit you like the most, close your eyes, imagine the fruit in your hand, you touch it, you feel its texture, you take it to your mouth, you eat a piece of this fruit, you feel the taste of it. Then open your eyes and look at your hands : what do you find ?
The same thing with “you”, “I”, the separate self : there is a sense of it, thoughts about it, stories, … but when you look, what do you see ?

"The understanding is taking place but it is not You understanding." How can that be? Isn't a brain required to understand?
So for me the me is the brain. I know you will say "that is a thought" and maybe you're right.

Yes it is a thought, you have never seen a brain making an understanding.
But I can sense my experience coming from a Center in the area where my brain is. It is more real to me than sight, sound, smell, taste, touch. Because if I close my eyes, be still and dismiss all thought, and make sure that I am not seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, or smelling anything, I still have this sense of existence. There is still an 'I' even if it is not doing anything or sensing anything.

I think it is a world prime : “experience splitting from a center in the brain area “; we need neurologist to study this.
Yes there is a sense of existence, a sense of being but it is not you, it is existence itself, the same existence in here, in there, in the animals and plants. When you say there is still an “I”, is “I” the name you give to existence ?
Bobs, where are you seeing from ?

This one will keep me up all night! I'm going to have to wait.
I am waiting for your answer on this.

Does that describe my experience? No, when I repeat the phrase "I see that there is no one there in direct experience" I have to admit that is not my truth.
It is not your truth even it is true. You have to see the truth for yourself. The experience shows what is known through the 5 senses, it never shows “I”, “me”, “you”. These are thoughts put on the experience.

Instead of hearing is happening, you say I hear
Walking is happening, I walk, etc …

WHAT is in front of me, in plain view?
In plain view, there are sights, sounds, smells, tastes, textures, thoughts and the Knowing of all of these. Where are you in all of them?

I can't see why anyone would have resistance to look.
Fine


Warissem

User avatar
BobS
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2020 7:08 am

Re: Seeking no self

Postby BobS » Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:15 am

Before I begin, Warissem, I want to thank you for being so patient with me. I cannot imagine the
patience that must be required to do what you do (perhaps because I still identify with a Self!)
When you say there is still an “I”, is “I” the name you give to existence ?
Bobs, where are you seeing from ?
No, I is not the name I give to existence. I am seeing from a center in my head.
"experience splitting from a center in the brain area" yes that describes it perfectly.
You have seen that “I” does not exist through the five senses.
I have? I never said that. The five senses are one (or actually 5) ways to see if something exists, but not the only one.
Aha, then what is knowing thoughts is different from the one which is reading and understanding. Would you describe both of them?
They are both that experience splitting from a center in the brain. They appear at different times. One is a witness to thoughts, one is a witness to words (reading). One understands.
In plain view, there are sights, sounds, smells, tastes, textures, thoughts and the Knowing of all of these. Where are you in all of them?
I am needed to interpret what is seen, heard, etc. If you cut the eyes from my head and pointed them at a tree, there would still be light entering the eyes. But no one would say that those eyes 'see' because there is no entity interpreting the light waves


Return to “THE GATE”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest