Thread for Clint

This is a read-only part of the forum. All threads where seeing happens are stored here and come from this forum, the Facebook guiding area and various LU blogs. The complete list, sorted by guide, contains all links. The archives include threads of those that came to LU already seeing as well.
User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 4788
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Thread for Clint

Postby Vivien » Mon Apr 20, 2015 7:09 am

Dear Clint,
all day with your instructions Vivien :) and so much came to light. i is a thought and awareness just is. between thoughts there is only sensation observed. who is it that observes; that sees? is that i? who is it that observes the observer?
Very good questions :)
Please answer them all.
Vivien: Where thoughts come from?
Clint: it is not known
Are thoughts coming from somewhere or are they just there?
Vivien: Where are they going?
Clint: not known
Are thoughts going somewhere?
Vivien: Can ‘you’ stop a thought in the middle?
Clint: i don't know
Then please look until you have an answer.

Can ‘you’ stop a thought in the middle? Yes or no? – go only with 100% certainty.

Vivien: Can ‘you’ predict what will be the next thought?
Clint: i doesn't know
Look until you have an answer.

Can ‘you’ predict what will be the next thought? Yes or no? – go only with 100% certainty.

Vivien: Can 'you' choose not to have painful or negative thoughts?
Clint: i has no answer
Look until you have an answer.

Can ‘you’ predict what will be the next thought? Yes or no? – go only with 100% certainty.

Love, Vivien
"In the seen, there is only the seen. In the heard, there is only the heard. In the sensed, there is only the sensed. You are located neither in this, nor in that, nor in any place between the two." - Buddha
http://fadingveiling.com/

User avatar
Clint
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2015 9:40 pm

Re: Thread for Clint

Postby Clint » Mon Apr 20, 2015 6:11 pm

all day with your instructions Vivien :) and so much came to light. i is a thought and awareness just is. between thoughts there is only sensation observed. who is it that observes; that sees? is that i? who is it that observes the observer?
Very good questions :)
Please answer them all.
if i can only be of thought then the observer is not i because there is no thought when observing. this is intellectually understood. it is seen that it is not a who that observes. not an 'i', but a what - awareness observes always and on all levels.
Vivien: Where thoughts come from?
Clint: it is not known
Are thoughts coming from somewhere or are they just there?
thoughts are just there as there is no where to come from and it is seen that they are only there if there is an 'i'. without an 'i' thoughts don't exist at all. thoughts come from 'i'...
Vivien: Where are they going?
Clint: not known
Are thoughts going somewhere?
there is no where that thoughts come from except from 'i' and there is no where for thoughts to go except to 'i'. there is only sensation and the awareness of sensation and then 'i' and its thoughts appear to describe what awareness has observed.
Vivien: Can ‘you’ stop a thought in the middle?
Clint: i don't know
Then please look until you have an answer.

Can ‘you’ stop a thought in the middle? Yes or no? – go only with 100% certainty.
'i' is powerless and can't 'do' anything except think thoughts. it has been seen that 'i' is beyond powerless - 'i' doesn't exist. no, 'i' can not stop a thought in the middle.
Vivien: Can ‘you’ predict what will be the next thought?
Clint: i doesn't know
Look until you have an answer.

Can ‘you’ predict what will be the next thought? Yes or no? – go only with 100% certainty.
it has been observed that 'i' does not exist to predict and that 'i' and thought can't be separated. for 'i' to predict a next thought it would have to be separate from thought so no 'i' can not predict what will be the next thought. there is certainty here, and uncertainty - it also feels like an intellectual understanding... is it 'i' that is certain and uncertain?
Vivien: Can 'you' choose not to have painful or negative thoughts?
Clint: i has no answer
Look until you have an answer.
Can ‘you’ predict what will be the next thought? Yes or no? – go only with 100% certainty.
do you mean, can 'i' choose not to have painful or negative thoughts? it has been seen; it is certain that there is neither an 'i' that can choose nor painful or negative thoughts to choose from, there is only the awareness of sensation.

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 4788
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Thread for Clint

Postby Vivien » Tue Apr 21, 2015 2:18 am

Dear Clint,
thoughts are just there as there is no where to come from and it is seen that they are only there if there is an 'i'. without an 'i' thoughts don't exist at all. thoughts come from 'i'...
“It is seen that they are only there if there is an ‘I’”- REALLY?
And what about the thought “There is a cup” – there is no ‘I’ in that thought… does this mean that there is no thought?

“Thoughts come from ‘I’” – and how is this EXACTLY known?
Where is this ‘I’ located EXACTLY?
How this ‘I’ produces thoughts?

there is no where that thoughts come from except from 'i' and there is no where for thoughts to go except to 'i'.
Read your above comment several times. You’re saying completely contradictory things. At one hand you say that thoughts neither go nor come from anywhere, but on the other hand they came and go from the ‘I’.

Find this ‘I’. Where is it EXACTLY?

there is no where that thoughts come from except from 'i' and there is no where for thoughts to go except to 'i'. there is only sensation and the awareness of sensation and then 'i' and its thoughts appear to describe what awareness has observed.
This is just a thought story….
'i' is powerless and can't 'do' anything except think thoughts. it has been seen that 'i' is beyond powerless - 'i' doesn't exist. no, 'i' can not stop a thought in the middle.
Again, read the above quote several times. Totally contradictory. Even intellectually it cannot stand.

- At one hand, this supposed ‘I’ is totally powerless, cannot do anything
- But in the second part of the sentence, magically it acquires power… it can think…

Look very-very closely….

What is this ‘I’ you are referring to that is totally powerless and full of power at the same time?
Vivien: Can ‘you’ predict what will be the next thought? Yes or no? – go only with 100% certainty.
Clint: do you mean, can 'i' choose not to have painful or negative thoughts? it has been seen; it is certain that there is neither an 'i' that can choose nor painful or negative thoughts to choose from, there is only the awareness of sensation.
This is an intellectual thought explanation.

Please do this exercise… Try to have ONLY positive thoughts in the next 30 minutes.
If the ‘I’ has a power, then you can easily do this.

Just as a warning, you have to have ONLY and EXCLUSIVELY POSITIVE THOUGHTS.
Not a single negative…
Not a single neutral…
Only positive thoughts for 30 minutes.
Please let me know how it went.


Love, Vivien
"In the seen, there is only the seen. In the heard, there is only the heard. In the sensed, there is only the sensed. You are located neither in this, nor in that, nor in any place between the two." - Buddha
http://fadingveiling.com/

User avatar
Clint
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2015 9:40 pm

Re: Thread for Clint

Postby Clint » Tue Apr 21, 2015 5:49 am

thank you Vivien. i'll get back to you :) i appreciate your view sistar!

lovenpeace

User avatar
Clint
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2015 9:40 pm

Re: Thread for Clint

Postby Clint » Sun Apr 26, 2015 8:39 pm

... too many words used to describe something very simple. It has been observed that When there is only an awareness of the impermanence of sensation in body there is neither thought nor any sense of 'i'. there is an observer that is either a unified I or no 'I' at all.

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 4788
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Thread for Clint

Postby Vivien » Mon Apr 27, 2015 1:07 am

Dear Clint,
It has been observed that When there is only an awareness of the impermanence of sensation in body there is neither thought nor any sense of 'i'. there is an observer that is either a unified I or no 'I' at all.
It seems that you have an idea about what seeing through the separate individual means… There are several assumptions and beliefs in your above comment, with an expectation that seeing through the separate individual is equal to having no thoughts.

You haven’t answered any of my questions I asked you a few days ago.

I can assist you to help see through the notion of a separate individual if you follow the rules we agreed on and reply to ALL the questions from LOOKING.

If you dismiss my questions – that are pointers where to look -, then I simply cannot help you.

Love, Vivien
"In the seen, there is only the seen. In the heard, there is only the heard. In the sensed, there is only the sensed. You are located neither in this, nor in that, nor in any place between the two." - Buddha
http://fadingveiling.com/

User avatar
Clint
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2015 9:40 pm

Re: Thread for Clint

Postby Clint » Mon Apr 27, 2015 8:33 am

And what about the thought “There is a cup” – there is no ‘I’ in that thought… does this mean that there is no thought?
'There is a cup' is a thought.
“Thoughts come from ‘I’” – and how is this EXACTLY known?
it isn't known.
Where is this ‘I’ located EXACTLY?
can a thought have a location?
How this ‘I’ produces thoughts?
it is not known
Find this ‘I’. Where is it EXACTLY?
can a thought have a location?
What is this ‘I’ you are referring to that is totally powerless and full of power at the same time?
i'm not sure what you are speaking of here Vivien. i didn't say that.
Only positive thoughts for 30 minutes.
Please let me know how it went.
i wasn't able to have only positive thoughts for 30 minutes

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 4788
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Thread for Clint

Postby Vivien » Tue Apr 28, 2015 12:08 am

Dear Clint,
Vivien: “Thoughts come from ‘I’” – and how is this EXACTLY known?
Clint: it isn't known.
Then where thoughts come from?
What is the actual experience of thoughts coming or going?

Vivien: Where is this ‘I’ located EXACTLY?
Clint: can a thought have a location?
Is this a question or a statement?
Are you saying that the ‘I’ is a thought?

Is it clearly seen that the ‘I’ is a thought, or is it rather an intellectual understanding?

If it’s clearly seen then please describe the process IN DETAIL (step-by-step), how you came to the conclusion that the ‘I’ is a thoughts. I’m not asking for theories here. Only the description of a step-by-step looking.

Vivien: How this ‘I’ produces thoughts?
Clint: it is not known
You wrote that “thoughts come from ‘I’”. If thoughts come from ‘I’ then this I is the author, producer, maker of thoughts. When I ask “How this ‘I’ produces thoughts?” then the reply is “I don’t know”.

This statement shows that although it cannot be known how the ‘I’ produces thoughts, it is still ASSUMED that the ‘I’ produces thought.

Saying that “I don’t know” is not enough for this inquiry. When thoughts come up saying “I don’t know” – it just means that more looking is needed.

So please do again…

How this ‘I’ produces thoughts? – go to the ‘I’ directly… and describe IN DETAIL how it authors thoughts.
Vivien: What is this ‘I’ you are referring to that is totally powerless and full of power at the same time?
Clint: i'm not sure what you are speaking of here Vivien. i didn't say that.
You haven’t read my comments BEFORE this question carefully. If you did then it would be clear.

My comment was a confrontation, showing that your comment was even logically contradictory, but you missed it. So here it is again:

You wrote: “'i' is powerless and can't 'do' anything except think thoughts. it has been seen that 'i' is beyond powerless - 'i' doesn't exist. no, 'i' can not stop a thought in the middle.”


Again, read the above quote several times. Totally contradictory. Even intellectually it cannot stand.
  • - At one hand, this supposed ‘I’ is totally powerless, cannot do anything
    - But in the second part of the sentence, magically it acquires power… it can think…
Look very-very closely….

What is this ‘I’ you are referring to that is totally powerless and full of power at the same time?
Vivien: Find this ‘I’. Where is it EXACTLY?
Clint: can a thought have a location?
Dear Clint, you might not like my comment, but you are not looking at all. Answering to a question with a question is not looking at all.

What is this resistance all about? What is the reason for avoiding looking?

Love, Vivien
"In the seen, there is only the seen. In the heard, there is only the heard. In the sensed, there is only the sensed. You are located neither in this, nor in that, nor in any place between the two." - Buddha
http://fadingveiling.com/

User avatar
Clint
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2015 9:40 pm

Re: Thread for Clint

Postby Clint » Wed Apr 29, 2015 12:16 am

What is this resistance all about? What is the reason for avoiding looking?
in meditation it became clear for the first time that the resistance and avoidance of looking is all about i potentially not being able to do what i thinks it is here to do if it continues with the inquiry.
Vivien: “Thoughts come from ‘I’” – and how is this EXACTLY known?

Clint: it isn't known.

Then where thoughts come from?
it came today in meditation that thoughts may come from past or future. though now that i think on it i am seeing that i can have a thought presently, like i am here and now. so, still not clear here...
What is the actual experience of thoughts coming or going?
near as i can tell now is that the actual experience of thoughts coming and going is that they begin and end without anything to do with me or i.
Vivien: Where is this ‘I’ located EXACTLY?

Clint: can a thought have a location?

Is this a question or a statement?
it's one a them question/statements :)
Are you saying that the ‘I’ is a thought?
yes, that is what i am saying.
Is it clearly seen that the ‘I’ is a thought, or is it rather an intellectual understanding?
i'm not sure - good question!
If it’s clearly seen then please describe the process IN DETAIL (step-by-step), how you came to the conclusion that the ‘I’ is a thoughts. I’m not asking for theories here. Only the description of a step-by-step looking.
i isn't outside the body... so i looked in this body and couldn't find a definitively physical i. without any other option it must be concluded that i is a mental construct or thought.
Vivien: How this ‘I’ produces thoughts?

Clint: it is not known

You wrote that “thoughts come from ‘I’”. If thoughts come from ‘I’ then this I is the author, producer, maker of thoughts. When I ask “How this ‘I’ produces thoughts?” then the reply is “I don’t know”.

This statement shows that although it cannot be known how the ‘I’ produces thoughts, it is still ASSUMED that the ‘I’ produces thought.

Saying that “I don’t know” is not enough for this inquiry. When thoughts come up saying “I don’t know” – it just means that more looking is needed.

So please do again…

How this ‘I’ produces thoughts? – go to the ‘I’ directly… and describe IN DETAIL how it authors thoughts.
i asked i and it had no response Vivien so in the absence of any thought about how i authors thoughts it must be concluded that i doesn't author thought.
Vivien: What is this ‘I’ you are referring to that is totally powerless and full of power at the same time?

Clint: i'm not sure what you are speaking of here Vivien. i didn't say that.

You haven’t read my comments BEFORE this question carefully. If you did then it would be clear.

My comment was a confrontation, showing that your comment was even logically contradictory, but you missed it. So here it is again:

You wrote: “'i' is powerless and can't 'do' anything except think thoughts. it has been seen that 'i' is beyond powerless - 'i' doesn't exist. no, 'i' can not stop a thought in the middle.”

Again, read the above quote several times. Totally contradictory. Even intellectually it cannot stand.

- At one hand, this supposed ‘I’ is totally powerless, cannot do anything
- But in the second part of the sentence, magically it acquires power… it can think…

Look very-very closely….

What is this ‘I’ you are referring to that is totally powerless and full of power at the same time?
when i made that statement Vivien i used the word 'except' to mean that i is powerless but for one ability - to think thought. there is no magic about it except perhaps in the word 'except'. said plainly, i has only one power - to think thoughts. now, in consideration of your reaction to that, i ain't sure :)
Vivien: Find this ‘I’. Where is it EXACTLY?

Clint: can a thought have a location?

Dear Clint, you might not like my comment, but you are not looking at all. Answering to a question with a question is not looking at all.
the thing is, i didn't like your tone or your questions. of course they implied an imbalanced i and the reason i is here - to see fully and completely through an i that can be offended at all. haha, i is so funny making assumptions about tone and meaning and then getting all bent outta shape about the assumption... hilarious!

apparently i is in the remedial preschool class - it must be so considering how attached it is to itself and its existence. i do really want to get this Vivien thank you for your patience and your help.

by the way, i have looked and can't find the whereisness of an i...

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 4788
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Thread for Clint

Postby Vivien » Thu Apr 30, 2015 12:39 am

Dear Clint,
the thing is, i didn't like your tone or your questions. of course they implied an imbalanced i and the reason i is here - to see fully and completely through an i that can be offended at all. haha, i is so funny making assumptions about tone and meaning and then getting all bent outta shape about the assumption... hilarious!
Thank you for your honesty, I really appreciate it. These questions are not personal at all. These questions are aimed to scrutinize the beliefs on which the impression of a separate self are based. And yes, my words are a bit confronting, but these beliefs needs to be confronted in order to see them clearly for what they are – only thoughts about a supposed separate entity (‘me’).

You did a very nice catch on how things are interpreted as being an ‘attack’ on this supposed entity. Words on the screen are filtered through these beliefs to support the idea of a separate self.
apparently i is in the remedial preschool class - it must be so considering how attached it is to itself and its existence. i do really want to get this Vivien thank you for your patience and your help.
Sometimes you write as if there were TWO of YOU…
  • (1) As if there was something, a ‘higher self’ or whatever that could see through or get rid of…
    (2) the ‘I’, the separate entity
Is this how you see it?
Vivien: What is this resistance all about? What is the reason for avoiding looking?
Clint: in meditation it became clear for the first time that the resistance and avoidance of looking is all about i potentially not being able to do what i thinks it is here to do if it continues with the inquiry.
This is important. As you see, if there are stories about negative consequences to the inquiry it can create resistance and/or fear with a result of avoiding looking.

So, could you please tell a little more about this? What is the story about?
What is it that you are here to do but the assumption is that you cannot do it if you continue with the inquiry?


Love, Vivien
"In the seen, there is only the seen. In the heard, there is only the heard. In the sensed, there is only the sensed. You are located neither in this, nor in that, nor in any place between the two." - Buddha
http://fadingveiling.com/

User avatar
Clint
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2015 9:40 pm

Re: Thread for Clint

Postby Clint » Tue May 05, 2015 7:03 pm

Well, I ended up writing most of this on my cell using my limited data plan and guess what!? It matters not! Bahahaha :-)
Sometimes you write as if there were TWO of YOU…

(1) As if there was something, a ‘higher self’ or whatever that could see through or get rid of…
(2) the ‘I’, the separate entity

Is this how you see it?
I sometimes call It the Higher Self but more often nowadays, mostly since you and Liberation Unleashed, 'It' is known as The Observer or simply awareness. And it is not to get rid of or see through but to reintegrate those unconscious and limited aspects of 'i' that believe themselves separate (which they ain't acourse :-)
Vivien: What is this resistance all about? What is the reason for avoiding looking?

Clint: in meditation it became clear for the first time that the resistance and avoidance of looking is all about i potentially not being able to do what i thinks it is here to do if it continues with the inquiry.

This is important. As you see, if there are stories about negative consequences to the inquiry it can create resistance and/or fear with a result of avoiding looking.

So, could you please tell a little more about this? What is the story about?
the avoidance/resistance is a common theme and one that I will continue to work through to the degree that I am aware. The story is about awakening/liberating this mind so as to help others to liberate theirs; to be the example I wish to see in the world and the example I wish to be is Absolute (as opposed to separate and limited) Being unified here and now. In other words to be God on Earth; to finally re-member Self as whole once again. Seriously sistar, i have no other goal... that I am conscious of anyway... Haha :-)
What is it that you are here to do but the assumption is that you cannot do it if you continue with the inquiry?
That assumption was. i've seen it now so the assumption that i won't be able to do it no longer exists as an inhibitor but has been turned around to become its opposite. In other words the assumption is that through self inquiry I will be able to example God on Earth; to be whole of mind and rock this planet with th'Love unconditional! thanks for helpin btw :-)

And, if it is to be that the goal described above is no longer important once the separate I has been reintegrated then, whatever :-) i will be good!

Oh by the way Vivien, I picked up a book called The Direct Path by Greg Goode and am appreciating it muchy - what are your thoughts about the book? Have you read it? I imagine you know of him?

Sincerely,

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 4788
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Thread for Clint

Postby Vivien » Thu May 07, 2015 1:43 am

Dear Clint,

Do you remember our first private conversation when I wrote that I will be tough and hard on you by questioning ALL beliefs? So the time has come :)

Everything you’ll read bellow is not an ‘attack’ on you, but on beliefs.

It’s very good and I’m thankful that you’ve shared these things, because what you wrote (those beliefs) are prevents looking.
I sometimes call It the Higher Self but more often nowadays, mostly since you and Liberation Unleashed, 'It' is known as The Observer or simply awareness. And it is not to get rid of or see through but to reintegrate those unconscious and limited aspects of 'i' that believe themselves separate (which they ain't acourse :-)
There is NO such thing as Higher Self.
The observer is nothing else then the separate self in disguise.
There is NO unconscious aspect of ‘I’.
There is NO form of a separate self of any kind (conscious or unconscious).
There is NO way to reintegrate into a higher self.
There are NEITHER a higher self NOR an individual I.

ALL of them are just BELIEFS.
The story is about awakening/liberating this mind so as to help others to liberate theirs; to be the example I wish to see in the world and the example I wish to be is Absolute (as opposed to separate and limited) Being unified here and now. In other words to be God on Earth; to finally re-member Self as whole once again.
There is NO such thing as absolute. This is just a belief.
You cannot be unified! There is nothing to be unified!

You will NEVER EVER be a God on Earth!
This is just a fairy tale to be very special and unique.
Believing this keeps the illusion separate self intact.
Only the seeming separate self wants to be a god. A very special being.
‘Being God on Earth’ is just a fairy tale, nothing more.
In other words the assumption is that through self inquiry I will be able to example God on Earth; to be whole of mind and rock this planet with th'Love unconditional! thanks for helpin btw :-)
Again, you will never ever be a god on earth.
There is no you to be a god.
And there is no god either.
All of these are just beliefs.

You will never ever be a whole mind.
There is no you to be whole.
There is no mind either.
These are just beliefs/thoughts.

And I CANNOT HELP YOU WITH THIS.
I CANNOT HELP YOU TO BECOME A GOD.
It is literally IMPOSSIBLE.
And, if it is to be that the goal described above is no longer important once the separate I has been reintegrated then, whatever :-)
The separate I will never ever be reintegrated.
There is NO separate self.
A non-existent thing CANNOT be reintegrated.

So I cannot help you with reintegrating something that is not there in the first place!
Oh by the way Vivien, I picked up a book called The Direct Path by Greg Goode and am appreciating it muchy - what are your thoughts about the book? Have you read it? I imagine you know of him?
Please go back to my first post to you, and read the rules again.
It is clearly stated that during our investigation all effort and attention is needed to this inquiry.
While you read or do anything else, you don’t do this inquiry.

4. Put aside all other teachings, philosophies and such for the remainder of this investigation.
Really put all your effort and attention in to seeing this reality, as it is. If you have a daily and
essential meditation practice, it is fine to continue that.


Dear Clint…
I cannot help with none of the above.
I cannot help you to become a god on earth.
I cannot help you to become special.
I cannot help you to reintegrate the separate I.
I cannot help you to become unified mind or whatever.
I cannot help you to become a higher self.
I cannot help you to support and sustain these beliefs.

The only thing I can help you with is to see and release these beliefs.
To see these beliefs for what they are.

You will NOT gain ANYTHING from this inquiry.
You will NOT be special.
You will NOT have super powers.

You just can LOOSE with this inquiry.
Loosing beliefs.
That’s all.

I can help ONLY with LOOSING these beliefs.

Love, Vivien
"In the seen, there is only the seen. In the heard, there is only the heard. In the sensed, there is only the sensed. You are located neither in this, nor in that, nor in any place between the two." - Buddha
http://fadingveiling.com/

User avatar
Clint
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2015 9:40 pm

Re: Thread for Clint

Postby Clint » Fri May 08, 2015 4:20 am

ok Vivien i understand and accept your requirements completely with one point to make. this part of the agreement i made:
4. Put aside all other teachings, philosophies and such for the remainder of this investigation.
Really put all your effort and attention in to seeing this reality, as it is...
is consistent with the author and his book. it is not another teaching, philosophy and such; it is all about the same thing that you are about - self inquiry - which is why i began reading it - to get another perspective and it has been helping.

you seem to disagree however and therefore i am happy to put it down and just be with the inquiry you-style :)

what's next?

LovenPeace,

me

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 4788
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Thread for Clint

Postby Vivien » Fri May 08, 2015 5:45 am

Dear Clint,
ok Vivien i understand and accept your requirements completely with one point to make.
You’ve completely missed the point! What I wrote in my last comment, those are NOT REQUIREMENTS. The only requirements that was in that post is the one you don’t want to comply with.

Those are not requirements but your beliefs, your expectations, and I stated that NONE of your expectations will be fulfilled by this inquiry.

This inquiry is the COMPLETE OPPOSITE what you desire for.
Your desire is to become unique and special, becoming an example that others can admire and follow.
With this inquiry you WON’T get ANY of that.
This inquiry is quite the opposite what you want.

With this inquiry YOU WILL LOSE EVERYTHING… You’ve become very mundane… nothing special, not standing out of the crowd, no followers. Is this REALLY what you want?

You don’t have to do this inquiry.
NONE of your desires will come true. NONE! Is this clear?
i understand and accept your requirements completely with one point to make.
is consistent with the author and his book. it is not another teaching, philosophy and such; it is all about the same thing that you are about - self inquiry - which is why i began reading it - to get another perspective and it has been helping.
Again, you've totally missed the point!

There is nothing wrong with Greg Goode’s book. But, while you read his or anybody’s book, you DON’T look.
You get very targeted questions directly questioning YOUR beliefs… and while you read or do anything else, you don’t LOOK!

These questions I ask are not simple questions to read once, then through a quick reply!
These questions are for looking ALL DAY LONG. HUNDRED TIMES A DAY!
Not just once, not twice, not ten times but hundreds.
Looking until it becomes totally clear without any doubt!

How do you plan doing that much looking if you spend your time on reading anything else?

We on page 2 now, and hardly any looking happened so far.
You simply did not do what I asked you to do.
If you don’t know how to look, that’s OK. Then tell me, and we will find a way until you know what looking is.
I gave you a detailed description how to look, but didn’t do that, neither said that you didn’t know how to do it.

I’m going to be very honest with you now.
There is a waiting list. People are waiting to be guided and most of them are WILLING to look. Many of them are literally desperate and would do anything to look through the self.
If you are not honest with me and don’t do the looking, then I will spend my time and energy on somebody else that is ready for seeing through the self.

And you might not be ready now. And that’s all right.
You might need to go somewhere else, finding a guru who promises all those things you are after.
The internet is full of these gurus, so it’s not hard to find one.

This inquiry WON’T give you anything you are after. It’s the complete opposite of what you want. Is this clear for you?
If yes, why do you want to go on with it?


Love, Vivien
"In the seen, there is only the seen. In the heard, there is only the heard. In the sensed, there is only the sensed. You are located neither in this, nor in that, nor in any place between the two." - Buddha
http://fadingveiling.com/

User avatar
0kay
Posts: 700
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 6:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Thread for Clint

Postby 0kay » Fri May 08, 2015 1:31 pm

Hi Clint,

i´m 0kay who wants to guide you for a while.
I´m a trainee in guiding, but... it is accepted by Vivien and if it´s okay to you we can begin.

As you know guides in LU point to things beside the way that should be watched also. The reason is to be shure about your body senses and their limitations. Then about thoughts, analysis of the thoughts and the sensation called "i" to make it leave if you agree.

We may have a look for other sensations like time, space, distance, emptyness, seamless and other feelings who may appear on this way, but mostly for watching and describing what happended in this moment.

Yes, i´ve seen your expectations and found it... high. Let´s have an eye for it in future. I felt some things that you experienced, the limitless one and no i. Now there are good feelings for a while but it´s not funny all day long. There are troubeled times as before but different, rough.

Let´s go through THE GATE if you like.
Which languages coud we use and about what senses should we look first to have the i-feeling?
Hingabe, in den Moment

devotion


Return to “ARCHIVES”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests