Life's curious path has led me here (on the way to where?)

[Cabs]

This inquiry addresses the initial, grosser levels of identity.

... and what happens from here onwards can't be discussed because it would be nothing more than thoughts and conjecture. What happens will just be what happens.

I'm not entirely following your description of the experience, but I think what you are getting at is the sense of experiencing two aspects. If so, what are the two aspects, an actor and a presence aware of the actor? Is this what feels like a dichotomy?

Hmmm, not really. It seems I'm splitting a single experience into two.

The thing I was grappling with is how to function amongst others - in the so-called 'real world' - as I begin to experience everything as constructs. But now I don't even really fully understand that question. 'Others' are not others at all. The question itself is built on a construct.

What do you mean by valuable tool?

Well, delusion is habitual, so I meant a means of seeing and aiding dissolution of the structures propping up habits of delusion.

[davjak]

... and what happens from here onwards can't be discussed because it would be nothing more than thoughts and conjecture. What happens will just be what happens.

It can be discussed but we're attending to the more immediate questions here that are likelier to have a more 'visceral' or 'palpable' resonance.

The thing I was grappling with is how to function amongst others - in the so-called 'real world' - as I begin to experience everything as constructs. But now I don't even really fully understand that question. 'Others' are not others at all. The question itself is built on a construct.

What about 'beginning to experience everything as constructs' is this also a construct? Is it a place to land? Can it be turned into a method or a practice?

What is the 'so-called real world'?

What can ask the question of how to function amongst others? If something needs to know how to function, doesn't that imply autonomy, choices and options? What is it that could be considering this, is there anything?

Well, delusion is habitual, so I meant a means of seeing and aiding dissolution of the structures propping up habits of delusion.

But there aren't actually any means of approach or ways to 'do' this, are there? Can anything be done in the expectation of getting a result? (This is not a superficial question.)

[Cabs]

What about 'beginning to experience everything as constructs' is this also a construct? Is it a place to land? Can it be turned into a method or a practice?

Yes it is also a construct, of course. It seems that there is nothing that could be written that is not. The desire or intention to turn it into a method/practice is a significant part of experience now - the 'idea' of it arises during momentary experiences, and then appears to become a 'tool', or a 'practice', with a perceived goal of changing the experience. Writing this supports my recent sense that there is still a separate something that views, tries, forces, wants. Not until that sense arises does that separate something itself get questioned.

What is the 'so-called real world'?

Experience as it has always appeared. The experience within which an illusion of separate self emerged and developed.

What can ask the question of how to function amongst others? If something needs to know how to function, doesn't that imply autonomy, choices and options? What is it that could be considering this, is there anything?

Only thought can ask the question. Thought and the illusion of knowledge (particularly of knowledge being necessary and/or valuable) still seems to steer the ship - the autonomy, choices and options they allude to is secondary.

Haha, there can't be anything considering this, but that is not how it feels - it only seems to 'feel' that way when the 'thought' that it's all thought arises, ironically.

It still seems intellectual - there are changes that have happened on a non-conceptual, feeling level (calmness, less fear-based thoughts, less opinion arising, less clinging and desiring, less future thinking, things seeming lighter, finding humour in things, etc), but when it comes to this understanding of no-self, it doesn't seem to exist without a self of some kind... it's as though it can't exist unless there is contrast. When I look it's not there, but when I don't look it is!

But there aren't actually any means of approach or ways to 'do' this, are there? Can anything be done in the expectation of getting a result? (This is not a superficial question.)

Ha ha, no. Despite the profundity of the question, there is no deeper answer that comes than "no".

[davjak]

Yes it is also a construct, of course. It seems that there is nothing that could be written that is not. The desire or intention to turn it into a method/practice is a significant part of experience now - the 'idea' of it arises during momentary experiences, and then appears to become a 'tool', or a 'practice', with a perceived goal of changing the experience.

So, there is an experience of seeing the fabricated aspect in others, but an overlooking of the fabrication of it being used as a tool 'here'? The lens has simply not turned back upon the lens to see the operator itself is the original fabrication? Something has preserved itself as not fabrication? How far a step is it to see this is all fabricated?

Writing this supports my recent sense that there is still a separate something that views, tries, forces, wants. Not until that sense arises does that separate something itself get questioned.

So, it's not what seems to be happening that is the fabrication, it's the view of it that is pure fabrication, right?

It still seems intellectual - there are changes that have happened on a non-conceptual, feeling level (calmness, less fear-based thoughts, less opinion arising, less clinging and desiring, less future thinking, things seeming lighter, finding humour in things, etc), but when it comes to this understanding of no-self, it doesn't seem to exist without a self of some kind... it's as though it can't exist unless there is contrast. When I look it's not there, but when I don't look it is!

Do you have an expectation of finding a positive rather than an absence? How can an absence 'exist'? What exactly is the expectation here?

Gaining intellectual comprehension is not to be avoided, but it doesn't sound like this is all intellectual for you. What you describe experientially is typical with seeing through the illusion of a separate self.

This inquiry doesn't aim at full no-self. It doesn't address the more subtle identifications of subjective experience. If there will be continuing dissolution of deeper levels of self-identification, that will be what happens. Here we are concerned with:

Are you a body or are you in a body (or is a body what seems to be happening)? Are you a willful agent who acts autonomously? Are you the source of anything? Do you make things happen, outwardly or 'within' the body? Do you think thoughts and control attention? Is there responsibility for Dan's thoughts, feelings, actions or lack of thoughts, feelings or actions? What is responsibility?

Ha ha, no. Despite the profundity of the question, there is no deeper answer that comes than "no".

If NOTHING can be done, what does this imply?

[davjak]

Is it possible to experience the loss of what was never there to begin with?

[Cabs]

So, there is an experience of seeing the fabricated aspect in others, but an overlooking of the fabrication of it being used as a tool 'here'?

Yes

The lens has simply not turned back upon the lens to see the operator itself is the original fabrication?

Yes. That experience is commonly absent.

Something has preserved itself as not fabrication? How far a step is it to see this is all fabricated?

A tiny step; but tiny or gigantic makes no difference when there is no control or choice in the matter.

So, it's not what seems to be happening that is the fabrication, it's the view of it that is pure fabrication, right?

Yes

Do you have an expectation of finding a positive rather than an absence? How can an absence 'exist'? What exactly is the expectation here?

Ha ha - good question. I was referring to absence of self being what there is if self is no longer there. I suppose the expectation is that it is possible for the sense of 'self', or agency, to permanently dissolve. For the clarity I experience during these discussions and meditations to carry through every moment.

Gaining intellectual comprehension is not to be avoided, but it doesn't sound like this is all intellectual for you. What you describe experientially is typical with seeing through the illusion of a separate self.

Good. It feels different.

This inquiry doesn't aim at full no-self. It doesn't address the more subtle identifications of subjective experience. If there will be continuing dissolution of deeper levels of self-identification, that will be what happens.

Understood. I feel oriented towards further, and the question naturally arises "what next?"

Here we are concerned with: Are you a body or are you in a body (or is a body what seems to be happening)? Are you a willful agent who acts autonomously? Are you the source of anything? Do you make things happen, outwardly or 'within' the body? Do you think thoughts and control attention? Is there responsibility for Dan's thoughts, feelings, actions or lack of thoughts, feelings or actions? What is responsibility?

The answer to all questions, but the last, is "no". Responsibility is a delusion created by thought and sensation.

These things feel and appear clear when prompted.

They do not necessarily feel and appear clear and present during each moment. The expectation that they should is part of that murkiness. If the prompt arises as a thought, clarity can appear with it. If the prompt does not arise in the moment, thought and sensation freely and rapidly fabricate an apparent mind and body with all the trimmings of separate self. Permanent, apparently not. Frequent, apparently yes.

After writing this, it is clear that one expectation is just leading to another expectation. It appears that a loop between doubt and expectation may be occurring - doubt that understanding is truly present, which is based on an expectation that understanding can/should be the permanent experience, which assumes no doubt will arise when it is, repeat...

If NOTHING can be done, what does this imply?

What seems to be effort and intention is not being done by anyone.

What appears as questions, doubts, thoughts, effort, etc., is what is in that moment - naturally occurring phenomena despite appearances. Simultaneously a process happening, a doubt that there is a process happening, and an expectation that a process should be happening.

[davjak]

Yes. That experience is commonly absent.

So is everything else absent that does not seem present. There is only what seems to be and nothing else to look for that is not presently happening.

There is nothing missing to look for. It's not a question of the content, how things appear or what is appearing/happening, how it feels, if it's self-like, etc., but is it happening to/for someone? If so, what is this presence things are happening to? Is there one, or is there just the unknowable, unfathomable happening? This is the question.

A tiny step; but tiny or gigantic makes no difference when there is no control or choice in the matter.

There is no step. It's a story. It's all stories, and this is not a problem. The dream is to believe the stories. To believe the stories, there has to be the first belief in 'me'. Then all other stories will revolve around and happen in relation to me. It's a dream. When the stories aren't believed they are just stories, not a prison that needs to be escaped from.

So, it's not what seems to be happening that is the fabrication, it's the view of it that is pure fabrication, right?
Yes

Because there is no view that is not fabricated, it's not the fabrication that is the issue, it's believing the fabrication; that's what me is, belief in stories. That's where the illusion is. The fabrication is not an illusion when it's not believed, right?

Ha ha - good question. I was referring to absence of self being what there is if self is no longer there. I suppose the expectation is that it is possible for the sense of 'self', or agency, to permanently dissolve. For the clarity I experience during these discussions and meditations to carry through every moment.

Nothing is there every moment, but no me is actually ever there. What may happen at times is a sense, i.e. thoughts and feelings of a separate self, but nothing carries through 'every moment'. There is no new, lasting state to achieve. There is no state at all, just what seems to be. Nothing is static and continuous, and there is nothing to seek that is not happening.

I suppose the expectation is that it is possible for the sense of 'self', or agency, to permanently dissolve.

It doesn't matter when recognized as illusory.

Understood. I feel oriented towards further, and the question naturally arises "what next?"

There is no next, only what seems to be, this apparent happening. What can look for a next?

They do not necessarily feel and appear clear and present during each moment. The expectation that they should is part of that murkiness. If the prompt arises as a thought, clarity can appear with it. If the prompt does not arise in the moment, thought and sensation freely and rapidly fabricate an apparent mind and body with all the trimmings of separate self. Permanent, apparently not. Frequent, apparently yes.

This inquiry is not clarity. It's still a story of one person on the end of an inquiry and another person on the other end. There are only stories all the way down. There is no end to them. But there can be an end to believing the stories and that I am experiencing them.

After writing this, it is clear that one expectation is just leading to another expectation. It appears that a loop between doubt and expectation may be occurring - doubt that understanding is truly present, which is based on an expectation that understanding can/should be the permanent experience, which assumes no doubt will arise when it is, repeat...

And, what is doubt?

What appears as questions, doubts, thoughts, effort, etc., is what is in that moment - naturally occurring phenomena despite appearances. Simultaneously a process happening, a doubt that there is a process happening, and an expectation that a process should be happening.

Is there a doer of anything whatsoever? If not, who can care what happens? If it feels like something needs to happen, does someone need to be there for that? It would only be a story to personalize it. What is happening is not personal, it's impersonal. No one makes it happen, and no one experiences it. There is no experiencer.

[Cabs]

It's not a question of the content, how things appear or what is appearing/happening, how it feels, if it's self-like, etc., but is it happening to/for someone? If so, what is this presence things are happening to? Is there one, or is there just the unknowable, unfathomable happening? This is the question.

Yes. Simple.

There is no step. It's a story. It's all stories, and this is not a problem. The dream is to believe the stories. To believe the stories, there has to be the first belief in 'me'. Then all other stories will revolve around and happen in relation to me. It's a dream. When the stories aren't believed they are just stories, not a prison that needs to be escaped from.

Yes. Also simple.

Because there is no view that is not fabricated, it's not the fabrication that is the issue, it's believing the fabrication; that's what me is, belief in stories. That's where the illusion is. The fabrication is not an illusion when it's not believed, right?

Yes. Again, simple. Believing is the consistent root of illusion, while fabrications and stories are ever-changing.

Nothing is there every moment, but no me is actually ever there. What may happen at times is a sense, i.e. thoughts and feelings of a separate self, but nothing carries through 'every moment'. There is no new, lasting state to achieve. There is no state at all, just what seems to be. Nothing is static and continuous, and there is nothing to seek that is not happening.

Haha, I can only seem to respond with yes, simple. Every time.

There is no next, only what seems to be, this apparent happening. What can look for a next?

Nothing can look - nothing is looking... but experience flows like a current. If a question about what follows floats past, any response is equally part of that flow - including no response. That is how this interaction emerged... Undoubtedly things will emerge beyond this... if no answer emerges after that specific question, at that specific time, then that is as much a part of the flow as if an answer did emerge...

But...

Even if that question does arise, why outwardly ask it? What is outwardly asking, and to whom? The fact that it's being asked out loud suggest belief in the story behind that question... hmmm.

This inquiry is not clarity. It's still a story of one person on the end of an inquiry and another person on the other end. There are only stories all the way down. There is no end to them. But there can be an end to believing the stories and that I am experiencing them.

Haha. This addresses my previous comment before I even wrote it.

And, what is doubt?

A story of course!

Is there a doer of anything whatsoever? If not, who can care what happens?

No one can actually care - the constructs that emerge with the perceived 'anything' create (and are) the sense of caring...

If it feels like something needs to happen, does someone need to be there for that? It would only be a story to personalize it. What is happening is not personal, it's impersonal. No one makes it happen, and no one experiences it. There is no experiencer.

Yes. Simple, isn't it. Haha.

[davjak]

Nothing can look - nothing is looking... but experience flows like a current. If a question about what follows floats past, any response is equally part of that flow

Experience flows and questions float past? What are they floating past? Is there the expectation that I will consciously experience my own absence, I want to notice when I am not here? What is this fixed thing that is positioned to recognize these things, flow, floating past, my no-self?

How do you feel about answering a set of questions that other guides will review? If they have questions, we will look into them. If they don't have any questions and we get 3 thumbs-up, we will conclude the inquiry, and you will get an invite to join the LU Facebook group and some other information, opportunities and resources. We can proceed with this if you feel ready. Are there any questions coming up? There is no rush.

[Cabs]

Experience flows and questions float past? What are they floating past? Is there the expectation that I will consciously experience my own absence, I want to notice when I am not here? What is this fixed thing that is positioned to recognize these things, flow, floating past, my no-self?

Good point.

"Floating past" is an inaccurate metaphor - it implies time - past & future - from & to. Not simply "is".

Floating past is just the appearance. Any connection of the momentary experience to what came before or what will come after is story.

It's easy believe the story of experience flowing, evolving, transitioning... but without the story, there just "is".

Is it even possible to experience my own absence, given that the "I" sense is a product of experience? An absence of "I" would equate to an absence of experience - one doesn't exist without the other. Or said another way, "I" and "experience" are the same thing.

How do you feel about answering a set of questions that other guides will review? If they have questions, we will look into them. If they don't have any questions and we get 3 thumbs-up, we will conclude the inquiry, and you will get an invite to join the LU Facebook group and some other information, opportunities and resources. We can proceed with this if you feel ready. Are there any questions coming up? There is no rush.

Ok. Sure. I have no preference in relation to this.

As for questions arising, there is nothing clear. Most of the 'questions' addressed here were 'asked' unknowingly - embedded within my responses. So if there are questions, you'll probably see them before I do. Haha.

[davjak]

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

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

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

4) Was there a pivotal moment in your inquiry?

5) Describe decision & give examples from experience.

Describe intention & give examples from experience.

Describe free will & give examples from experience.

Describe choice & give examples from experience.

Describe control & give examples from experience.

What makes things happen? How does it work?

What are you responsible for? Give examples from experience.

6) Anything to add?

[Cabs]

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

No and No.

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

What it is: A belief. Sensations appear with thoughts as 'explanations'. These stories include constructs of time (past and present), space (here, there, outside, inside), feelings and emotions, physical objects, identity, etc.

When it starts: It starts every instance. Every sensation is the start.

how it works from your own experience: Every moment, in what appears to be the same instance sensation and thought appears. This simple blip explodes into the appearance of everything! Feelings, emotions, identity, illusion of agency, an observer, time, space... All in an instant. The next instant, the same thing.

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

Everything is the same - but it feels less personal. Quieter and calmer. There is less appearance of rumination, or cycling of feelings, emotions, thoughts, less future thinking, less justifying - when I say less, I mean none, really. None appearing to be carried onward beyond any moment they may have appeared. Events are isolated, not linked in an infinite chain.

4) Was there a pivotal moment in your inquiry?

There was a moment that stood out - I was questioning something that emerged from the guided discussion, and it appeared very clearly that anything considered as "me" is nothing but constructs.

Describe decision/intention/free will/choice/control & give examples from experience.

All of these are the same thing. All an illusion of agency. I am not deciding to write this sentence, although it appears that way. There is no me to decide to do it. It is just happening with all the sensation and thought arising in this moment. Any apparent decision is indistinguishable from the thought and sensation occurring in any moment. Intention, free will, choice, control - they are all appearances.

What makes things happen? How does it work?

Haha, I literally have no idea! Anything I could possibly say would be a story.

What are you responsible for? Give examples from experience.

Firstly, there is no 'me' to be responsible for anything. Secondly, there is no decision, control, choice, intention, free will... responsibility would require those things.

6) Anything to add?

Nothing that is free of a story.

[davjak]

Let's have a look at something here:

When it starts: It starts every instance. Every sensation is the start.

Are there not thoughts, sensations, sights, sounds, smells and tastes that are not claimed or associated with a self-sense? Is the sense of a separate self constant, or does it seem to come and go, at times be absent or seemingly forgotten about?

how it works from your own experience: Every moment, in what appears to be the same instance sensation and thought appears. This simple blip explodes into the appearance of everything! Feelings, emotions, identity, illusion of agency, an observer, time, space... All in an instant. The next instant, the same thing.

I wonder if you want to take another crack at this one, how the illusion of a self works? The question does ask, "from your own experience" (let's disregard the apparent contradiction of one's own experience for the moment). But a blip exploding into the appearance of everything is probably stretching the bounds, maybe? If you were to say something less speculative and metaphorical, how might you answer the question in a way that doesn't deny or overlook what is unknowable?

[Cabs]

Are there not thoughts, sensations, sights, sounds, smells and tastes that are not claimed or associated with a self-sense?

Hmmm... yes, there are. So more accurately it starts with identification of, or with those things. Identification could be as simple as a label or assumed knowledge of what it is, through to a more comprehensive, associative identification of it as belonging to, or representative of "me".

Is the sense of a separate self constant, or does it seem to come and go, at times be absent or seemingly forgotten about?

Yes it can/does come and go.

I wonder if you want to take another crack at this one, how the illusion of a self works? The question does ask, "from your own experience" (let's disregard the apparent contradiction of one's own experience for the moment). But a blip exploding into the appearance of everything is probably stretching the bounds, maybe?

haha. It was quite humorous answering these - Everything I was jotting down just sounded like a total story. I just ended up summing it into "a blip that explodes into everything". Haha.

If you were to say something less speculative and metaphorical, how might you answer the question in a way that doesn't deny or overlook what is unknowable?

OK, how the illusion of self seems to work from my current experience:

1. Something will appear - a sensation, a thought, a feeling, maybe all 3.
2. Thoughts will instantly arise to offer context, meaning, purpose, answers, criticism, judgment, knowledge
3. These thoughts are often accompanied by sensations that then get contextualised by association with thoughts, and appear as feelings and emotions like fear, anger, worry, confidence, happiness, disappointment, rejection, etc.
4. These things appear very real, and stories appear (more thought) to explain or make sense of these occurrences.
5. These stories appear with an identity attached - either as the experiencer, or the observer -
6. This appears with a sense of agency - the illusion of control, choice, intention, etc.
7. If these stories (thoughts and sensations) are believed, then an illusory separate identity has appeared to believe it.

It all appears to happen in an instant.

[davjak]

OK, I have submitted for review. Now we just sit tight... :)