Unwilling Materialist

Welcome to the main forum. When you are ready to start a conversation, register and once your application is processed a guide will come to talk to you.
This is one-on-one style forum, one thread per green member.
User avatar
Twang
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:41 am

Re: Unwilling Materialist

Postby Twang » Fri Jul 13, 2018 4:40 pm

When you look out the window and you look at the grass, what colour is the grass?/color]
Green

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 4259
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Unwilling Materialist

Postby forgetmenot » Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:33 pm

When you look out the window and you look at the grass, what colour is the grass?
Green
Great!

Now close your eyes, what colour is seen?

Kay
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/

User avatar
Twang
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:41 am

Re: Unwilling Materialist

Postby Twang » Sat Jul 14, 2018 4:44 am

Now close your eyes, what colour is seen?
If you're still asking me to ignore the afterimages, flashes, and other such things, then black.

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 4259
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Unwilling Materialist

Postby forgetmenot » Sat Jul 14, 2018 7:02 am

Now close your eyes, what colour is seen?
If you're still asking me to ignore the afterimages, flashes, and other such things, then black.
Wonderful, yes! (The flashes etc are just colour as well, but are just focussing on the black).

Okay, so let’s do the following exercise again, keeping in mind that when you close your eyes, the colour seen is black (ignoring everything else except the black).

With eyes closed, take in a couple of deep breaths to settle the dust.
Then notice there is the experience of 'blackness'. There may a bright light, a red glow, sparkly bits or cloudy flecks appearing and disappearing - It really doesn't matter about the specifics. We are just noticing ‘blackness’.

1) With eyes closed, can you confirm that what is experienced is simply AE of colour labelled ‘black’?
2) Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than seeing ‘black’?
3) Can what is seeing ‘black’ found?
4) Can a pair of eyes, an 'I' / 'me', a person be found that is ‘seeing’ ‘black’?
What do you find?

Is there anything that is witnessing the colour labelled ‘black’? Or is there just 'black’ to be found?

Look very carefully. Where does ‘seeing’ end and colour begin? Can a dividing line between ‘seeing’ and colour be found? Or is there just seeing/colour?

Can a 'see-er' ever be found in 'what is being seen' – AE colour?

If that is all, and no INHERENT SEE-ER found . . . would anything that is suggested as the see-er be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?


Okay….then open the eyes and look around.

Is there a difference between the ‘black’ when eyes are closed and ‘colour’ when eyes are open or are they both simply the appearance of colour?

Is there anything that is witnessing colour? Or is the colour and seeing colour one and the same?


Kay
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/

User avatar
Twang
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:41 am

Re: Unwilling Materialist

Postby Twang » Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:09 am

With eyes closed, can you confirm that what is experienced is simply AE of colour labelled ‘black’?
yes
Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than seeing ‘black’?
no
Can what is seeing ‘black’ found?
no
Can a pair of eyes, an 'I' / 'me', a person be found that is ‘seeing’ ‘black’?
What do you find?
I can't locate anyplace or anything where this experience is happening
Is there anything that is witnessing the colour labelled ‘black’? Or is there just 'black’ to be found?
Not sure how to answer this.
Look very carefully. Where does ‘seeing’ end and colour begin? Can a dividing line between ‘seeing’ and colour be found? Or is there just seeing/colour?
No dividing line
Can a 'see-er' ever be found in 'what is being seen' – AE colour?
no
If that is all, and no INHERENT SEE-ER found . . . would anything that is suggested as the see-er be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?
not sure
Is there a difference between the ‘black’ when eyes are closed and ‘colour’ when eyes are open or are they both simply the appearance of colour?
no difference
Is there anything that is witnessing colour? Or is the colour and seeing colour one and the same?
I don't know. (I feel like the answer you want is "yes". Should I answer that so we can move on? I'm not sure how best to do this process.)

User avatar
Twang
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:41 am

Re: Unwilling Materialist

Postby Twang » Sat Aug 25, 2018 2:17 am

Does the colour itself suggest in any way that it knows anything about an ‘apple’? Or is it just simply AE of colour?
just colour
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that the colour appearing is that of an ‘apple’?
it isn't
Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is an apple, and that it knows anything about an ‘apple’? Or is it just simply AE of sensation?
just sensation
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that it is the sensation has anything to do with an ‘apple’?
it isn't
Does taste itself suggest in any way that it knows anything about an apple? Or is there just simply AE of taste?
just taste
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that it is the taste of an ‘apple’?
it isn't
Does smell itself suggest in any way that it knows anything about an apple? Or is there just simple AE of smell?
just smell
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that it is the smell of an ‘apple’?
it isn't
Does the sound itself suggest in any way that it knows anything about an apple? Or is there just simple AE of sound?
just sound
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that it is the sound is that of an ‘apple’?
it isn't
Does the label itself or the thought itself know anything about an ‘apple’? Or are they just simply AE of label/thought?
just thought
So is there really actual experience of an ‘apple’, or what is actually appearing, what the actual experience is, is colour, sensation, taste, smell, sound, which thought then labels and describes as an 'apple'?
In other words, is an apple actually known or only thoughts about an apple are known?
only thoughts, and the colour, sensation, taste, smell, and sound.

I feel like I get this, but you're telling me I'm not (and I trust you understand this more than I do), but i don't know what it is I'm not getting.

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 4259
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Unwilling Materialist

Postby forgetmenot » Sat Aug 25, 2018 2:49 am

Hello Jimi,
So is there really actual experience of an ‘apple’, or what is actually appearing, what the actual experience is, is colour, sensation, taste, smell, sound, which thought then labels and describes as an 'apple'?
In other words, is an apple actually known or only thoughts about an apple are known?
only thoughts, and the colour, sensation, taste, smell, and sound.

So is an apple actually known, or only thoughts ABOUT an apple are known?
I feel like I get this, but you're telling me I'm not (and I trust you understand this more than I do), but i don't know what it is I'm not getting.
This is how you LOOK. And you are not looking. When I give you pointers, do you go through and look to see if what is being pointed at can be found in smell, thought, taste, colour, sound or sensation? It seems not to me, because your responses don’t reflect looking.

Looking is a nice simple thing - there is no need to over-complicate it.

Just look now...a thought can be found, but can a thinker of thought be found?
Can an “I” be found in thought itself?

Sound can be found, but can a hearer of sounds be found?
Can an “I” be found in sound itself?

Colour can be found, but can a see-er of colour be found?
Can an “I” be found in colour itself?


Sensation can be found, but can a feeler of sensation be found?
Can an “I” be found in sensation itself?

Smell can be found, but can a smeller of smell be found?
Can an “I” be found in smell itself?

Taste can be found, but can a taster of taste be found?
Can an “I” be found in taste itself?

Experience can be found, but can an experiencer of experience be found?

It's as simple as that. Just look and see what is actually present - and what is only imaginary.

Kay
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/

User avatar
Twang
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:41 am

Re: Unwilling Materialist

Postby Twang » Sat Aug 25, 2018 8:08 pm

Just look now...a thought can be found, but can a thinker of thought be found?
Can an “I” be found in thought itself?
I can't find the thought, either (if I'm understanding this "looking"). Is that how this is supposed to work?

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 4259
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Unwilling Materialist

Postby forgetmenot » Sun Aug 26, 2018 12:08 am

I can't find the thought, either (if I'm understanding this "looking"). Is that how this is supposed to work?

Aren't you aware of every thought that you have? Are not thoughts known just as colour, smell, sensation, taste and sound are known? You keep wanting to deny actual experience. Actual experience is exactly that...experience that IS appearing in the current moment. I am not asking you to find a thought...how can you possibly find a thought...they simply arise and subside. What exactly is it that is trying to find a thought?

In doing the 'apple' exercise, did not the label 'apple' appear? READ THE FOLLOWING VERY CAREFULLY. Does it say anything about thoughts not being "found"?

Taste labelled ‘apple’ is known
Colour labelled ‘apple’ is known
Sensation labelled ‘apple’ is known (when apple is touched)
Smell labelled ‘apple’ is known
Thought about/of an ‘apple’ is known

However, is an apple actually known?

K
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/

User avatar
Twang
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:41 am

Re: Unwilling Materialist

Postby Twang » Wed Aug 29, 2018 5:15 pm

Aren't you aware of every thought that you have? Are not thoughts known just as colour, smell, sensation, taste and sound are known? You keep wanting to deny actual experience. Actual experience is exactly that...experience that IS appearing in the current moment. I am not asking you to find a thought...how can you possibly find a thought...they simply arise and subside. What exactly is it that is trying to find a thought?
It's not about denying experience, it's more that the crux of the LU argument seems to be that since we can't locate a "self" it must not exist, but we can't locate thoughts either and we're fine w/ them existing. I'm trying to sort out this seeming contradiction.
However, is an apple actually known?
No

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 4259
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Unwilling Materialist

Postby forgetmenot » Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:51 pm

It's not about denying experience, it's more that the crux of the LU argument seems to be that since we can't locate a "self" it must not exist, but we can't locate thoughts either and we're fine w/ them existing. I'm trying to sort out this seeming contradiction.
There is no LU argument, there is only LOOKING. It is through the LOOKING that you will find your own answers. You are the one who doesn't want to LOOK and see what I am pointing at, so that the pieces start to fall into place, because you are too busy wanting to reconcile your INTELLECTUAL UNDERSTANDING of what is being pointed at instead of LOOKING. I repeat, it is through the LOOKING that everything starts to fall into place, and we haven't gotten very far in your thread, because you simply don't want to LOOK - you just want to argue. THIS IS NOT A DISCUSSION. If you want to discuss non-duality, the concept of no self etc, then go find a forum where it is discussed...this forum is about LOOKING to see if you can actually find a separate self. I keep telling you to LOOK and you don't, so I then tell you that I can't guide you any longer, so you beg me to continue with the promise of LOOKING - AND YOU STILL DON'T WANT TO LOOK!

I asked you if you had read archived threads etc and you said yes. Obviously you haven't, and you certainly haven't read any or my guidings. I am tired of this hamster wheel with you. I am not here to convince you of anything and it is certainly no skin off my nose if you don't want to LOOK and see through the illusory self as a means to end suffering. I am not the one who suffering from heavy dark thoughts, or who is suffering period...you are. I haven't suffered in a very long time. If you don't like what LU has to offer, then go somewhere else, but please stop wasting my time. I have given you lots of time and kept of guiding because it is in me to try and help others to see and have the freedom that seeing through the illusory self brings. I have gone above and beyond with you and continued to guide you, which you have shown no appreciation for. You seem to think that your time is more valuable than mine...that I don't mind wasting my time and that I have time to waste on those who don't want to LOOK. All guides are volunteers here who have lives outside of LU and certainly don't need to be spending time, holding hands with those who have no intention of LOOKING. Each time you say you will LOOK - and you don't, you simply want to argue. I wonder how long you would last if you had a music student you were teaching the guitar to, who thought they knew everything, weren't willing to listen to you, kept repeating the same mistakes because they thought they knew better and didn't want to practice? How long before you would tell them that they weren't really interested in learning the guitar, but that they were only interested in the IDEA of learning the guitar and being a guitarist? They were simply in love with the notion of being a Jimi Hendrix and not actually interested in learning to play the guitar?

Here is a parting gift. This was written by a guide some time ago for those who don't want to LOOK, but want to argue and discuss. Why come to LU if you don't want to LOOK?

http://www.liberationunleashed.com/reso ... ar-seeker/

Dear Seeker, It's Never Easy to Write This...

I’m not sure how many ways I can tell you this, and so most times I just have to repeat myself. You don’t listen. Thoughts crowd out the very ability to listen to direction. And! You often become frustrated with this direction and walk away from our inquiry thinking that the pointer can’t be of much use. You assume that the person giving it is just wrong about what it is you need to hear in order to see this. But the truth is,

You’re wrong.
There’s a reason why this particular pointer is the most effective I’ve come across. It’s direct. Blunt. It leaves no room for discussion, and my role is to end the discussion entirely.

I don’t want a dialogue with you!

Don’t be offended by that.

While a dialogue may help you to UNDERSTAND what’s being said, that understanding isn’t what’s going to get this done. I’ll tell you what will and I’ll give it my best shot, knowing that it’s worked for hundreds of people already, maybe thousands. Here it is, so listen up.

Just Look.
That’s it. It’s the best and most thorough pointer you’re going to find if you could just stop long enough to do what’s directed.

Now, you have to ask yourself this… how is it that this pointer can be it. The one. Everything. The KEY? Go ahead and ask that question. Test it out. Tear it up. How is that IT?

And when you hit a brick wall, just maybe you’ll do what’s being asked which is to notice that a speck of dust is more real than the self. A droplet of dew is more real than the self has ever been or can ever be.

How is that true? In what way is that true?

When the answer comes, just stop and take that in. Then scan that brain for all of the teachings which say that this is simple. Childlike. Humble. Think of all the accounts of those who’ve ‘gotten it’ and said that they couldn’t believe how simple it is. And the look of wonder? It’s not because they’re suddenly seeing pixie dust or rainbows. It’s because they stopped to follow the directive, and then they saw the truth of REALITY AS IT IS.

Now….

Just.
Look.
Look at the picture in this post.
What is seen?
What is absent?

Look at anything.
Anywhere.
Any time.
What is seen?
What is not?
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/


Return to “THE GATE”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 3 guests