I still believe in Santa Claus

[Thailand]

Hi Elad,

I hope you're well. I just got back from my meditation retreat.

Some thoughts...

1) Never believe what others say about the nature of awakening, including me. Only keep looking and discarding what is false. You can play with instructions you get and see what happens, but don't make them into more then skillful means at best.

We had three main teachers: a Thai nun, an English monk and a lay teacher. All of them were absolutely wonderful and gave great talks. The English monk was hilariously blasphemous. I have nothing but good things to say about their teachings. It was however, interesting that all three of them seemed to have a similar attitude toward awakening/enlightenment. From my knowledge of Buddhism I don't think it's that unusual. In Zen less so but...

The general thinking seems to be that awakening is not something that happens often at all, there are very few people who experience it in this lifetime, and there's a feeling like it's a far off goal at the top of a distant mountain. They didn't come out and say this but... it's probably not going to happen so don't get your hopes up.

The message seemed to be that the lessening or cessation of suffering (dukha) is definitely possible through commitment to meditation and the teachings of the Buddha, so it's best to just pursue that. Not bad advice at all but I can't help but wonder if that was the original teaching of the Buddha.

Religious figures like Christ and the Buddha (whether they actually existed or not) obviously gave teachings that have been distorted and misused in various ways. I can't help but wonder if the Buddha would've bothered to teach about awakening if it was something that could only occur after thousands of lifetimes on earth.

The mystical aura around Christ and the Buddha turns them into these God-like characters that one could only aspire to be like in the smallest ways... rather than seeing them as allegories of how each seeming individual can end the dream of separation. If you really absorb the core of their stories, rather than what's been added onto them over the centuries, I think both their stories point in the exact same direction. Awakening is everyone's birthright.

In more modern non-duality circles, the thinking seems quite different. Awakening is something that can occur in this lifetime. It's WHAT IS right here and now, there's nothing mystical or magical about it. But practice has to include direct questioning of false beliefs we've taken for granted, not just meditation.

I know I'm over-simplifying things here. And I know that words like awakening and enlightenment are just more concepts but it's hard to get around them.

Essentially awakening is not this magical, far away goal that it's been made out to be. And I'm not saying that one teaching is better/more valuable/more whatever than the other. It's that, for example, what you're doing here on LU is stripping away a lot of the clutter that's been placed on top of teachings like Buddhism that are non-dual and focused on awakening at their original core.

As I'm sure you're aware, Buddhadasa, the founder of Suan Mokh, was all about stripping away non-essential stuff that's been added onto Buddhism. I'm with him. Thai Buddhism is so beautiful but, hoo boy! There's a lot added on.

Other than that... my back was killing me most of the time. At home I meditate in a chair so my body was not happy with me sitting on the ground for eight hours a day. There were lessons in that of course. As you know, Wat Suan Mokh is very beautiful and serene. It was an all day long meditation no matter what we were doing. Lots of beautiful quiet and realizations of certain things that need to fall away.

2) Weather your practice will feel calm or restless, concentrated or distracted, blisful or despairing and everything in between --- keep seeing if it is true that ALL OF THAT/THIS is happening by itself, and that whatever is imagined as a you succeeding or failing is just a fantasy added on top.

Thank you. This advice came to me at times when a lot of anger or whatever strong emotion/memories were arising. I gained some clarity on a certain pattern that repeatedly occurs in close relationships. But on reflection, I'm able to see that it happens by itself due to conditioning, rather than a flaw in "Pete."

There was also a lot of fear of the future that arose. A sense of impending doom that I think a lot of people are feeling these days. But whatever happens will happen by itself without "me" being in control of it.

I hope you've had a good couple of weeks and I'm happy to get started with you again.

[Elad]

Hi Pete,

Lovely to read about your retreat.

So, here in LU we keep the work sharply focused. Just on this:

Is it clear that there is no self/doer/controller, never was and never will be?

If not, what is not clear?

If yes, how does it feel to clearly aknowledge this?

[Thailand]

Thank you for reminding me of what I'm here for. There were a lot of strong feelings arising around what I wrote about, after the retreat. However, it probably would've been better to write it down privately instead of here.

Is it clear that there is no self/doer/controller, never was and never will be?

Yes

If not, what is not clear?

Nothing. However, I feel the need to mention... during my meditation retreat, the SENSE of a self was very apparent wrapped up with feelings of physical pain. "My" back is hurting. "I" can't focus. This is driving "me" crazy. The intensity of sensations made a separate self seem very real.

If yes, how does it feel to clearly aknowledge this?

As I mentioned in an earlier post, there's are ideas that arise that I SHOULD feel grief or fear or something, by acknowledging that there is no self/doer/controller, never was and never will be. But those feelings aren't really arising. There is the thought, "How can I grieve the 'death' of something that was never there to begin with."

If I'm being honest, there was also this secret hope going into the Vipassana retreat that I would have some sort of breakthrough where I would wake up fully to this awareness. Inquiry and effort was done in meditation to try to realize this. Effort was dropped to try and realize this. There was no deeper acknowledgment or breakthrough that occurred though.

[Elad]

Your sharing after the retreat was perfect Pete. And now we are back to the main issue :)

Is it clear that there is no self/doer/controller, never was and never will be?

Yes

Great.

If not, what is not clear?

Nothing. However, I feel the need to mention... during my meditation retreat, the SENSE of a self was very apparent wrapped up with feelings of physical pain. "My" back is hurting. "I" can't focus. This is driving "me" crazy. The intensity of sensations made a separate self seem very real.

Yes, habitual selfing patterns associated with different things, including importantly pain, do not just go away when self-illusion is seen for what it is. However, it does become clear that this is just an automatic activity, somewhat like a child saying it wants to see a movie or get candy, when it experiences discomfort.

If yes, how does it feel to clearly aknowledge this?

As I mentioned in an earlier post, there's are ideas that arise that I SHOULD feel grief or fear or something, by acknowledging that there is no self/doer/controller, never was and never will be. But those feelings aren't really arising. There is the thought, "How can I grieve the 'death' of something that was never there to begin with."

Spot on. Nothing is lost except a misunderstanding. All beautiful aspects of life and being human continue. Everything real and wholesome about human life continues. And also the way life move between pain and pleasure continues. It is just an important step in not adding extra suffering to pain.

If I'm being honest, there was also this secret hope going into the Vipassana retreat that I would have some sort of breakthrough where I would wake up fully to this awareness. Inquiry and effort was done in meditation to try to realize this. Effort was dropped to try and realize this. There was no deeper acknowledgment or breakthrough that occurred though.

Yes conditioned fantasies of something else that will remove the pain and discomfort of normal life do not stop with seeing through the illusion. Again this is just one step in a long process of deconditioning.


Here is a video for you to watch, let me know what reactions come up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJQcD588g2w

[Thailand]

Reactions to the video coming up...

As far as understanding intellectually, the penny has already dropped. Essentially, I get it. But there's a sense of frustration or that the intellectual understanding is inadequate. "There's a deeper awakening that's supposed to happen. Why aren't I 'falling'? Grrr!"

For most of my day I'm still operating as if "I" am in charge. I am the do-er. It's just habits of thinking that haven't just disappeared. There are moments of reflection on the fact that it's all just happening, but they're just moments throughout the day. It's a process of reconditioning, I have to remember.

"Once the initial recognition happens, a new way to see everything opens up." So did that already happen? Has it not happened yet? Am I already falling?

"Once the core belief is gone, it's like a computer system where some old software has to be cleaned up." So letting go of old beliefs, in my experience is easier said than done. I can say I release something all day long but it seems like if an old program is there it's there. Beliefs can leave or change of course but it's more complicated than just recognizing and saying I release them.

Maybe I should journal or just write down old beliefs that seem to be in the way?

"Freedom is not from a negative situation but within the situations." This is the freedom I've been seeking. Seemingly good or bad experiences continue to happen but I'm not suffering from feeling victim to experiences.

"It is an end to seeking but not an end to exploring." I have been seeking my whole adult life, often with a sense of desperation or unsatisfactory-ness underneath. Wouldn't it be nice to just explore out of a sense of joy and curiosity?

I have not experienced this state of "blissful ease" she talks about that people then drift away from. Sounds nice.

"We did not get all our beliefs in a day. Neither can we drop them all at once... there is conditioning that may need some work." I have to remember that that's what we're doing here. The process has to unfold in its own time.

"Working with the mind. And here you can use many tools." She mentions Byron Katie's process and her own process. I'd like to have one foolproof way of dismantling beliefs that I could go to over and over.

I've used a method of shadow work/internal parts work called Focusing. It's not about dismantling the voices/beliefs/parts, it's just about sitting with them, getting to know them and allowing them to transform. Would this be in accord with what we're doing here?

"And resting in being. For this you don't need anything." "Holding attention in the heart and sitting in silence." I have tried for years to have a consistent meditation practice but it's always been off and on. I enjoy it greatly so why is there such resistance? The resistance to meditation is something that needs to be explored also.

"Don't compare your unique experiences to someone else's descriptions of their experience." Important to remember. There is desire for things to happen in preconceived ways and quickly.

"Let go of the need to understand." This is a big one for me. The pattern that runs deep is the need to understand things intellectually rather than allowing things to happen or taking action when needed.

[Elad]

Hey!

Focusing is a great tool for "shadow work", totally compatible with what we do here.

As for feeling like "you do" things in every day life, what exactly creates or is the "feeling" that it is "you" ?

After awakening there is still the experienced difference between intentional action (calulate 9 times 3 plus 2, the feeling of that) and unintentional happening (tripping over a doorstep). And yes, for most of us, we will be a fair bit in "intentional action mode" and then it feels like that. Could it be that that what you erroneously believe is "feeling like you", just is "feeling intentional" ?

Second thing, thoughts about self/others continue to run, just like thoughts about here/there, before/after. Even when it is seen experientially that these thoughts are not reality itself, but rather patterns of thinking and communicating. And after awakening the difference between me/you, here/there, before/now are still recognized and felt. However WHEN you look genuinely, it is seen and felt clearly that there is no real self outside of the ongoing construction in thought and communication, that themselves happen spontaneously without choice.

When you see and feel that, be curious about how it feels, without trying to make it feel different, say blissful or special. Be curious about exactly how it feels.

So.... "selfing" happens without self. Intentional action happens without self. Look! Can you see this clearly? See it in how selfing and intentional action start and finish. See that it just happens when it happens. Just like being lost in thought or not being lost in thought just happens.

As for bliss, the video can be misleading. Not everyone get bliss. Some people get the big bang experience, like jumping into a lake and getting wet, and having a thrill over the sudden change. Other people it is more like walking in a humid fog and after a while, imperceptibly, things have changed. The real question is not if it feels special or good - this is crucial to see and accept! The real question is: Looking right now, is it clear beyond doubt that there is no separate separate self here, never was and never will be?

Notice that when you make this about how it is for "most of the day" and/or "how it feels to you" it inherently maintains the belief in the illusion of self, it puts the energy in selfing. If you said "most of the day, or all the day, I am without self" it would also be a type of selfing, just more sneaky. It is inherently misleading to evaluate where you are at with awakening in terms of how most of you day is, or feeling good or bad. It creates not looking at what actually is experienced already but being preoccupied with self-fantasy. You need to bring all attention to what is absolutely true in experience NOW.

-------

Inquiry:

For the next day return again and again to seeing how whatever is happening now is just happening, by itself, without a self choosing or initiating it. When you see it you can say things like:

- now this!
- X happening by itself
- X happening without self

X here refers to whatever is happening NOW, stuff like "thinking about what they think about me", "hearing the wind", "inner talk about what is felt", " scratching the head", "stopping to consider what to do next", "thinking of an example of an intentional action, like washing the dishes". etc etc.

Let ne know how it goes.

[Thailand]

Thank you for your thorough reply, Elad.

Could it be that that what you erroneously believe is "feeling like you", just is "feeling intentional" ?

Yes. When attention is focused on some sort of task, especially if it's complex, the feeling like "I" am doing it arises. When routine actions happen or something happens that "I didn't do," I don't feel such a personal connection.

Second thing, thoughts about self/others continue to run, just like thoughts about here/there, before/after. Even when it is seen experientially that these thoughts are not reality itself, but rather patterns of thinking and communicating. And after awakening the difference between me/you, here/there, before/now are still recognized and felt. However WHEN you look genuinely, it is seen and felt clearly that there is no real self outside of the ongoing construction in thought and communication, that themselves happen spontaneously without choice.

Yes. The notion that "I" am the chooser, the one planning and acting out the events of my life, appears to be programming that runs very deep. Communication and actions continue to occur but there is the recognition that they happen by themselves and aren't dictated by a separate self.

For the next day return again and again to seeing how whatever is happening now is just happening, by itself, without a self choosing or initiating it. When you see it you can say things like:

- now this!
- X happening by itself
- X happening without self

Once again, there is the sense that if something seems more important or personal to me, then "I" am the one who did that thing. Something like, "If I didn't do it, then who did?" Then considering that it is in fact occurring by itself/without self.

When I frequently add words to occurrences like, "scratching my face is happening by itself" or "feeling guilty about that is happening without self," there is a distance of sorts that seems to form. There is an awareness that is sitting in silence "observing" all these things occur or thoughts/feelings arise. Observing is not the right word though, "allowing" might be more accurate. There is the sense of a field that all of it occurs in but it's not observing with interest, it's allowing whatever appears to appear.

There is some of that old sense of fear arising. That if "I" don't really exist and all of it is just arising spontaneously, then what's been the point of this entire life? It could be as trivial as scratching my chin or as serious as winding up living on the street, it's all just seemingly occurring to this character of Pete.


These are not direct experience but thoughts arising...

There is a feeling/idea rising up that (maybe) everything about who I am, and all human beings are... is completely ROBOTIC. Our thoughts and actions are just pre-installed software that is altered or updated throughout our lives through various forces. The software drives the actions of this "robot" called the body.

There are also thoughts arising about the metaphor of the "movie screen as our lives" that non-dual teachers use. All of us are something like a sentient movie screen. All the thoughts/feelings/events/etc. of our lives are projected onto the screen and we take those events as "me" and "my life." Forgetting that we are the screen underneath that is empty and silent, accepting of everything and allowing the movie to be played. And the movie itself that is assumed to be all that is.

However, the story of "my life" is far more convincing and hypnotic than any movie could ever be. It's 3 dimensional, it includes all five senses, thoughts, feelings and all the rest. It's closer than the nose on my face. Closer than my next breath.

In a Hollywood movie, you identify with the hero of the story and go along for the ride. In the movie of my life, Pete is the hero of the story. The character of Pete seems to have a desire to wake up to the fact that he's just a character. There's the underlying "Being" or "True Self" that is awareness, that Pete at least imagines is calling out for Pete to step aside so it can become apparent. But the idea that they are two separate entities, "Being" and "Pete," is not accurate.

There's a Woody Allen movie called Purple Rose of Cairo that comes to mind. A movie character suddenly realizes it's all just a movie and walks off the screen.

At the moment, these thoughts and feelings don't feel joyful and liberating. They feel somewhat dismal and nihilistic. Nothing wrong with that, it's just what's arising for now.

[Thailand]

Dismal and nihilistic is a bit too strong. It just feels weird. :)

[Thailand]

Just had an interesting realization. Not the first time I've noticed this but… "Talking to myself is happening by itself/without self." That's what's happening quite often. There is a voice in my head that is speaking and clarifying things. Seeming to convince "myself" of my correctness in many things. It can be self-righteous or disparaging or a lot of things. But who is speaking and who is listening? No one. They're just processes happening in the form of a "voice."

[Elad]

Hey!

Once again, there is the sense that if something seems more important or personal to me, then "I" am the one who did that thing. Something like, "If I didn't do it, then who did?" Then considering that it is in fact occurring by itself/without self.

When I frequently add words to occurrences like, "scratching my face is happening by itself" or "feeling guilty about that is happening without self," there is a distance of sorts that seems to form. There is an awareness that is sitting in silence "observing" all these things occur or thoughts/feelings arise. Observing is not the right word though, "allowing" might be more accurate. There is the sense of a field that all of it occurs in but it's not observing with interest, it's allowing whatever appears to appear.

Can anything like an observing or a field be found outside of just direct experience, just what is?

There is some of that old sense of fear arising. That if "I" don't really exist and all of it is just arising spontaneously, then what's been the point of this entire life? It could be as trivial as scratching my chin or as serious as winding up living on the street, it's all just seemingly occurring to this character of Pete.

Nihilistic reactions are a normal passing phenomena. They are however not direct experience, rather a subtle form of resistance, a subtle form of negativity.

These are not direct experience but thoughts arising...

There is a feeling/idea rising up that (maybe) everything about who I am, and all human beings are... is completely ROBOTIC. Our thoughts and actions are just pre-installed software that is altered or updated throughout our lives through various forces. The software drives the actions of this "robot" called the body.

Again, if by "robotic" we mean "in seamless accordance with nature, with the law of nature" then yes.

However, if by robotic we bring in conotations of something less alive, less mysterious, less valuable - this is all purely mental, purely resistance and negative interpretation.

There are also thoughts arising about the metaphor of the "movie screen as our lives" that non-dual teachers use. All of us are something like a sentient movie screen. All the thoughts/feelings/events/etc. of our lives are projected onto the screen and we take those events as "me" and "my life." Forgetting that we are the screen underneath that is empty and silent, accepting of everything and allowing the movie to be played. And the movie itself that is assumed to be all that is.

Can you actually find a screen separate from the movie in direct experience?

Or is this just another belief (this one reinforced by some non-dual teachers...).

However, the story of "my life" is far more convincing and hypnotic than any movie could ever be. It's 3 dimensional, it includes all five senses, thoughts, feelings and all the rest. It's closer than the nose on my face. Closer than my next breath.

In a Hollywood movie, you identify with the hero of the story and go along for the ride. In the movie of my life, Pete is the hero of the story. The character of Pete seems to have a desire to wake up to the fact that he's just a character. There's the underlying "Being" or "True Self" that is awareness, that Pete at least imagines is calling out for Pete to step aside so it can become apparent. But the idea that they are two separate entities, "Being" and "Pete," is not accurate.

Yes can you see that both ""being" and "Pete" are thoughts, beliefs ?

There's a Woody Allen movie called Purple Rose of Cairo that comes to mind. A movie character suddenly realizes it's all just a movie and walks off the screen.

At the moment, these thoughts and feelings don't feel joyful and liberating. They feel somewhat dismal and nihilistic. Nothing wrong with that, it's just what's arising for now.

Yeah this is some conditioning flowing through. As long as it is seen it is not more then that, it just part of a shifting weather system, so to speak.

[Elad]

Just had an interesting realization. Not the first time I've noticed this but… "Talking to myself is happening by itself/without self." That's what's happening quite often. There is a voice in my head that is speaking and clarifying things. Seeming to convince "myself" of my correctness in many things. It can be self-righteous or disparaging or a lot of things. But who is speaking and who is listening? No one. They're just processes happening in the form of a "voice."

Yes, this is good.

[Thailand]

Again, if by "robotic" we mean "in seamless accordance with nature, with the law of nature" then yes.

However, if by robotic we bring in conotations of something less alive, less mysterious, less valuable - this is all purely mental, purely resistance and negative interpretation.

Thank you for that perspective. I can see that "robotic" meaning somewhat lifeless, is just an interpretation rather than allowing for something that doesn't need to be labeled.

Can anything like an observing or a field be found outside of just direct experience, just what is?

No. There is the assumption or label that there is something observing "over here" and whatever phenomenon happening "over there." Or a thought/feeling/sensation happening "in here" that a separate observer is aware of. I'm in a cafe right now and if I close my eyes attention can be honed in on the sound of the music or those people's conversation. Attention can be collapsed on just that cup or that photograph. Just taste the coffee and feel of the warmth. The collapse of attention on just one thing is just a process, not the action of a separate observer at a distance.

There SEEMS to be an observer and the thing experienced in a "field", but it's actually just an experience of sight/sound/taste/etc. in direct experience. Distance between "observer" and "observed," labels like loud or delicious, internal and external... are all concepts placed on top of direct experience, that come from a lifetime of conditioning. Even personal preferences like, I like the taste of chocolate I don't like the taste of olives, are just thoughts and beliefs interacting with each other.

There's a trap of thinking that there is a "background" called awareness and separately the objects or thoughts/feelings that appear within it. When actually it's all made of and known by awareness... another concept but...

Can you actually find a screen separate from the movie in direct experience?

Or is this just another belief (this one reinforced by some non-dual teachers...).

No, there is no "screen" separate from the "movie" in direct experience. It's just an handy way of visualizing a concept given by some non-dual teachers. Just a pointer.

Here's what trips me up about this metaphor though. If you go see the movie "Jaws," at the end of the movie the screen is not covered in blood and saltwater. It was just a temporary drama occurring on an unchanging background called a screen. In a similar way, the events of our lives APPEAR to be playing out on a background of empty awareness. There is a felt sense (but maybe it's just another idea), that there is an empty "field" that is completely unsullied and unchanged by all the experiences/objects/thoughts/etc. that appear within it. Another concept... this is the paradox of life. Life is both that which appears to change AND the eternally unchanging.

Yes can you see that both ""being" and "Pete" are thoughts, beliefs ?

Yes. I can see that things like Being/Pete, movie/screen are just more thoughts and beliefs. They're dualistic by nature. They are my conditioning (the mind's?) attempt to understand what is beyond intellectual understanding. "Pete" wants things to be organized a certain way so they make logical sense.

I'm kind of laughing at myself but there is conditioning that says direct experience is just so not gratifying. There's no mental games that can be played with it. It just IS. There's nothing to grasp onto and try to manipulate so the conditioning says it's boring and pointless.

And once again I'm splitting things into "me" and "it" but there's such a pull from a "deeper part" of myself to set aside all the concepts and fully experience what's right here.

[Elad]

Again, if by "robotic" we mean "in seamless accordance with nature, with the law of nature" then yes.

However, if by robotic we bring in conotations of something less alive, less mysterious, less valuable - this is all purely mental, purely resistance and negative interpretation.

Thank you for that perspective. I can see that "robotic" meaning somewhat lifeless, is just an interpretation rather than allowing for something that doesn't need to be labeled.

Right, you're welcome.

Can anything like an observing or a field be found outside of just direct experience, just what is?

No. There is the assumption or label that there is something observing "over here" and whatever phenomenon happening "over there." Or a thought/feeling/sensation happening "in here" that a separate observer is aware of. I'm in a cafe right now and if I close my eyes attention can be honed in on the sound of the music or those people's conversation. Attention can be collapsed on just that cup or that photograph. Just taste the coffee and feel of the warmth. The collapse of attention on just one thing is just a process, not the action of a separate observer at a distance.

There SEEMS to be an observer and the thing experienced in a "field", but it's actually just an experience of sight/sound/taste/etc. in direct experience. Distance between "observer" and "observed," labels like loud or delicious, internal and external... are all concepts placed on top of direct experience, that come from a lifetime of conditioning. Even personal preferences like, I like the taste of chocolate I don't like the taste of olives, are just thoughts and beliefs interacting with each other.

There's a trap of thinking that there is a "background" called awareness and separately the objects or thoughts/feelings that appear within it. When actually it's all made of and known by awareness... another concept but...

Can you actually find a screen separate from the movie in direct experience?

Or is this just another belief (this one reinforced by some non-dual teachers...).

No, there is no "screen" separate from the "movie" in direct experience. It's just an handy way of visualizing a concept given by some non-dual teachers. Just a pointer.

Here's what trips me up about this metaphor though. If you go see the movie "Jaws," at the end of the movie the screen is not covered in blood and saltwater. It was just a temporary drama occurring on an unchanging background called a screen. In a similar way, the events of our lives APPEAR to be playing out on a background of empty awareness. There is a felt sense (but maybe it's just another idea), that there is an empty "field" that is completely unsullied and unchanged by all the experiences/objects/thoughts/etc. that appear within it. Another concept... this is the paradox of life. Life is both that which appears to change AND the eternally unchanging.

Given that the screens and observing awareness and so forth are all just concepts, please drop them here. Stay focused on: Is there anything that seems to be "the self"/me/I? And is it? Or is actually just spontaneous nature?

[Thailand]

Given that the screens and observing awareness and so forth are all just concepts, please drop them here. Stay focused on: Is there anything that seems to be "the self"/me/I? And is it? Or is actually just spontaneous nature?

Is there anything that seems to be "the self"/me/I?

Yes, there are many things that SEEM to be the self but it is just due to conditioning. The self cannot be found on closer examination.

And is it?

No, the things that seem to be the self are definitely not a self, separate or otherwise.

Or is actually just spontaneous nature?

Yes, the various arisings/functions that happen are just spontaneous nature.

Is there anything that seems to be "the self"/me/I?

Going back to the first question for a deeper look. A question could be posed... "To whom does there SEEM to be a self?"

If there IS NO SELF, then there is no entity actually there for a self to seem to appear to. Both the supposed "observer" and "observed" are just thoughts/beliefs/assumptions appearing to consider other thoughts/beliefs/assumptions. And thoughts/beliefs/assumptions have no independent reality so assuming anything to be connected to a self has less reality than a puff of smoke considering another puff of smoke.

The thoughts and beliefs that Pete holds dear seem to have an air of being the most precious things Pete "possesses." If there is no self then they can't be possessed by or occur to anyone, anything, any entity. They just occur like the taste of bread or the sound of birds.

I feel like I just discovered how a magic trick works, but there's no one to "get it." Like a I just got the punchline of a joke but there's no one here to laugh, the laughter can only arise spontaneously.

[Elad]

Halleluja :D

Write more.......