Great, let’s open the eyes then.
Let's move on to opening the eyes now.
Again, address this very simply - The 'seeing' sense only for the moment.
With eyes open, a world of objects appears . . . a room . . . a computer screen etc
What you can specifically see isn't of interest here, and whatever it is, I am simply going to refer to it as 'what can be seen'.
This might be a little more tricky, but give it some consideration.
1) With eyes open, can you confirm that what is experienced is 'what can be seen' as I mentioned?
2) Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than 'what can be seen'?
3) Can what is witnessing 'what can be seen' be found?
4) Can a pair of eyes, an 'I' / 'me', a Stacey be found that is witnessing 'what can be seen'?
Or is there just simply 'what can be seen' to be found?
What do you find?
Can an INHERENT SEE-ER be found? Would anything that is suggested as the see-er, be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?
And sound:
For this exercise you will need to sit yourself near a clock that has an audible second
hand. If you don’t have a ticking clock, there are plenty of them on youtube, just search.
Listen to the sound. “Tick tock tick tock tick tock tick tock”
Focus on the tick tock. Attune to the sound itself. IGNORE any explanatory thoughts about what must be creating the sound.
Try to find the clock.
1. Going just by the tick tock sound, do you find a clock present?
2. Is there any direct/actual experience of a clock in the sound?
3. Does the sound come self-labelled as originating from the clock?
4. Do you find a clock hidden in the sound?
5. Do you find a clock beyond the sound?
6. In your direct/actual experience of the sound, do you find any evidence that the sound is caused by a clock?
Allow your eyes to open.
Were you able to establish that in your direct/actual experience of the tick tock sound, that there was a clock?
Were you able to find a division between hearing and sound?
Were you able to establish where hearing ended and sound begin, or was there just pure experience labelled as sound?
For a sound to be ‘known’ then there must be a ‘knowing’ (experience) of sound! Can a dividing line be found between the ‘knowing’ (experience) of the sound and the sound (known) itself? Or is there only ‘knowingknown’?
You’re not missing anything. You’ve already seen through…
There’s no one here. No one doing the seeing. No one doing the hearing. No one in control of a gap. :)
that makes me feel like there is something between me and the experience
Is this direct experience or a thought about how something ‘should’ be?
So maybe its not that I haven't seen through the self but its more a lack of practice separating thoughts from experience?
That is the illusion reasserting itself as the one who must now practice.
But if there is no one seeing or hearing who is going to practice?
Who is going to “separate” thoughts from experience?
Who needs to get better?
Look again now, freshly:
Is there any self doing, watching, choosing?
Much love,
Becca
