Who is writing this thing?

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
Nameless1995
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 6:13 pm

Who is writing this thing?

Postby Nameless1995 » Mon May 26, 2014 3:37 pm

What am I supposed to realize?
That there is no separate self?
Separate self? What does that even mean? Separate from what?
What is going on?
Experiencer is there. So is experience.
But who is there when experience is gone?
And what expeirencer is there when experiencer is gone?
Experience and experiencer are inseparable.
My very nature is experience. Experience is an attribute of experiencer, and it is the only thing that can be accessed.
All we have is a set of experiences.
There is no no-experiencer but the experience itself is the experiencer.
The whole experience is me or not-me, what makes me me? It is just a game of semantics.
The source of experience itself cannot be experienced, nothing I experience is me, all stories.
But all I experience is me, because experience is the experiencer.

When I was 7 (ok I was probably older like 11, 12 who cares?) years of age
I was thinking about time, about infinite boundless time, and it was a paradox, and it messed my head,
I looked at the leaf, so strange it was all, so mysterious, and at once, all broke, the I was gone. There was an intense spaciousness yet a voidness and also an allness, and a familiarity yet a non-familiarity. I went to the mirror to find me. I was thinking but I could not associate with the thoughts. It was strange, so I came down to my usual mode within some secs, and ignored it, I was like: whatever.

As I go sleepy my thoughts run amok, it does not need anyone to control, it comes and goes, and then creates a dream for me.

Then why identify with thoughts?
Feelings are the same, they appeared reflexively. It is programmed to be so.

So why identify?

Thoughts and feelings and imaginations need not be indentified as me.
As blind I remain, as deaf I can remain, without touch I can remain.
So I don't need to identify with them. I don't need to identify myself with the six senses.

But when the six senses are removed (sixth sense = thoughts, imaginations, blah blah) what remains?

The Void.

So am I just the void?

Then how does experience come to be when the six sense come to be? How does consciousness come to be?

Because it was not Void.

It was potential consciousness.

Consciousness is always consciousness of something and the something is the story presented by the six sense.

Just like light needs a surface to shine, consciousness needs something to be conscious of to become consciousness.

When the something is removed consicousness become void but it still remains in potential form.

When the stories created by the mind and senses falls under the void pool of consciousness, experiences emerges.

I am that void, the potential consciousness.

But the stories try to pretend as me.

I search I find no one, how can the seeker be found, how can one eat his own head?

Now why is the story not me? Why is the fiction not me?
Why not me?

Just because I cant control?

Who says I cant control?

What if they are on autopilot, and then I can come and control.

I can intent and think.

But who intends?

Who wills?

Where does the will arise from?

Unknowable.

Do I control when I control or an illusion of control.
Lot of time its just illusion, programmed action, but all time?

Meh, who carez?

Whatever happens, just happens.

But just because I am the experienced does not mean, I am the experienced objects too.
The experienced object may still exist outside experience or may be not.

But no one can know.

What is the need of realization and experience?

What if its another delusion, another story?

Who gets liberated? Who was bound?

Who identifies itself with the stories and suffer? who cuts off the identification?

Conscious effort can take control, can remove programs create new programs?
Whose effort?

Is there anyone giving conscious effort,

or just consciousness of some effort going on?
Who cares?

Now what am I supposed to do?

User avatar
Alexw
Posts: 1364
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2014 5:50 am

Re: Who is writing this thing?

Postby Alexw » Mon May 26, 2014 3:59 pm

Hi,

Many questions - and a lot of answers too :-)
Thank you for the great post.

Should I call you nameless or do you prefer another name?
My name is Alex, and I would be happy to discuss this further - if you like.
Now what am I supposed to do?
Do you have any expectations? Why did you come to LU?
But just because I am the experienced does not mean, I am the experienced objects too.
The experienced object may still exist outside experience or may be not.
But no one can know.
Can anything exist without YOU (not the personal you/I/self) knowing it?

Regards
Alex

User avatar
Nameless1995
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 6:13 pm

Re: Who is writing this thing?

Postby Nameless1995 » Mon May 26, 2014 4:17 pm

Hi,

Many questions - and a lot of answers too :-)
Thank you for the great post.

Should I call you nameless or do you prefer another name?
My name is Alex, and I would be happy to discuss this further - if you like.
Now what am I supposed to do?
Do you have any expectations? Why did you come to LU?
But just because I am the experienced does not mean, I am the experienced objects too.
The experienced object may still exist outside experience or may be not.
But no one can know.
Can anything exist without YOU (not the personal you/I/self) knowing it?

Regards
Alex
Whatever name goes.
The flow of life brought me here.
Expectations, I have them and I don't have them. Something happened and I came to notice the inner silence and calmness and that never left and I never suffered since then and even if I suffered I was not suffering. The inner silence expects nothings, yet junks get created by the programs all the time.

I will say, I am just curious about the experience. What experience is it talked about here?
I had experienced a little glimpse of no-self when I was a kid (still am) but I didn't give it any importance,
until later when I could compare a bit with that. but I guess I stopped the experience from happening full filled.

So I am a bit curious.

The I that is not the persona, is just awareness, what does the awareness know? Awareness is simply aware,
of all the information and stuff that creates the story of the self.
The more integrated the information the stronger the self and the stronger the something to be aware of.
Knowledge and all is only a part of the information the something to be aware of, not the awareness itself?
Or is it?

User avatar
Alexw
Posts: 1364
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2014 5:50 am

Re: Who is writing this thing?

Postby Alexw » Mon May 26, 2014 4:53 pm

I will say, I am just curious about the experience. What experience is it talked about here?
I had experienced a little glimpse of no-self when I was a kid (still am) but I didn't give it any importance,
until later when I could compare a bit with that.
LU is about realising that there is no separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form.
It is also about realising that there is no one to decide, intend, choose or control events in life. No one there to make anything happen. From what you have written in your first post I see you have jumped that hurdle a while ago.

I dont understand this sentence - can you please explain:
I guess I stopped the experience from happening full filled.
The I that is not the persona, is just awareness, what does the awareness know? Awareness is simply aware of all the information and stuff that creates the story of the self.
Are there different "I's"? One that is a persona and one that is not? How would you define "story of the self"?

Is there awareness of something? Can you find a separation/border between awareness and something to be aware of?
Looking at this experience that you are aware of - is there awareness separate from the experience?

User avatar
Nameless1995
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 6:13 pm

Re: Who is writing this thing?

Postby Nameless1995 » Mon May 26, 2014 5:29 pm

I will say, I am just curious about the experience. What experience is it talked about here?
I had experienced a little glimpse of no-self when I was a kid (still am) but I didn't give it any importance,
until later when I could compare a bit with that.
LU is about realising that there is no separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form.
It is also about realising that there is no one to decide, intend, choose or control events in life. No one there to make anything happen. From what you have written in your first post I see you have jumped that hurdle a while ago.

I dont understand this sentence - can you please explain:
I guess I stopped the experience from happening full filled.
The I that is not the persona, is just awareness, what does the awareness know? Awareness is simply aware of all the information and stuff that creates the story of the self.
Are there different "I's"? One that is a persona and one that is not? How would you define "story of the self"?

Is there awareness of something? Can you find a separation/border between awareness and something to be aware of?
Looking at this experience that you are aware of - is there awareness separate from the experience?
So when I experienced the no self, I was in some form of silent observer mode and the sense of self had disappeared. But I had read something more happens if the experience continues, the merging of experience and experiencer and bla bla, but nothing happened, no shift happened in my mind at that time.
So I said I guess I stopped the experience, I came out.

There is a border, and there is not.
Separation and unity as I see, is more of a game of semantics.

• Separation and unity are just two different types of perspectives. When you touch a crow you encounter a sensation, when you smell it you receive a different sensation, when you hear the crow’s voice, it is a different experience.
• Those are different aspects of the same one crow, but still you cannot deny that they are different, separate and distinct aspects even though they are the aspects of the ’one’ crow.
• Again I can classify a tree as a different object than a crow. You cannot just deny the difference.
• But again, I can say that both the tree and the crow are part of one whole process, just like odor and the voice of the crow are just different parts of the one whole crow.
• I can just view the whole totality as one system, and say all are parts of it.
• But these are all just mere plays of words. Both separation and unity are two angles of perception, neither of them is perfectly true or false.

So I can say there is no border just life playing with itself but again in different sense I can say otherwise.

To find separation I have to be conscious,

and to be conscious I have to be aware of something.

So consciousness or the whole experience as it is now, is the product of the union of something and awareness.

And thats all I have the experience or rather I am the experience nothing to divide nothing to unite.

But in the experience the somethings are constantly changing, but something remains unchanging.

That unchanging backgroud is who I am, and all the change takes lace on it.

Like a movie screen the screen remains the same, only pictures changes, yet all that changing is a part of screen not the separate thing from the screen, but for the sake of explanation I am separating it.

The most basic material is the void pool of consciousness. It remains even in dreamless sleep. The potential consciousness turns into consciousness when there is some good interconnected information or something to be conscious of.

The fundamental property of my whole subjective world is consciousness, that is all it is, it is the screen in which stuffs are appearing. Forming a set of experiences.

The story of the self, is the story that I am some coherent persona that can persist through time and there is some form of soul or something which has some eternal persona or whatever behind this all.

the story that I am just a limited portion of my experience, the story of an entity that controls everything.
The story that I know why I do things. The story created by the mind.

In a dream, I am not just the little guy talking and flying or doing whatever, in the dream, I am the whole dream.

User avatar
Alexw
Posts: 1364
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2014 5:50 am

Re: Who is writing this thing?

Postby Alexw » Mon May 26, 2014 7:19 pm

So when I experienced the no self, I was in some form of silent observer mode and the sense of self had disappeared. But I had read something more happens if the experience continues, the merging of experience and experiencer and bla bla, but nothing happened, no shift happened in my mind at that time.
So I said I guess I stopped the experience, I came out.
You are talking about an I that experiences. What is this I, this entity? Can you find it in direct experience?
What is "my mind"? Any more than thoughts appearing saying that this entity that is experiencing is "I/self"?
Is there an entity "thinker"?
When you touch a crow you encounter a sensation, when you smell it you receive a different sensation, when you hear the crow’s voice, it is a different experience.
Yes, true, but is there a "you" that receives these sensations? Can you find this entity besides thought stating that there is one?
Those are different aspects of the same one crow, but still you cannot deny that they are different, separate and distinct aspects even though they are the aspects of the ’one’ crow.
Are you sure? What is this "one crow"? When you look at this crow is it any more than just some black colour in a certain shape? When you hear it, is it any thing than simply sound? When you touch it does it feel like "a crow" or is there simply pressure? What is "crow" if not just a concept compiled by thought?
Again I can classify a tree as a different object than a crow. You cannot just deny the difference.
Yes, you can classify... but what classifies? Is this classification based on direct experience or this just thought telling you that there is a tree and there is a crow and they are different?
I can just view the whole totality as one system, and say all are parts of it.
What views this totality? Is there a subject looking at a multitude of objects? If there is no subject (no entity "I"), can there be objects?
But these are all just mere plays of words. Both separation and unity are two angles of perception, neither of them is perfectly true or false
Yes, both separation and unity are just concepts, but we need concepts otherwise there would be no communication possible... I see your point with the two angles of perception, but there really is only one. The second angle is not really pure perception/experiencing anymore but an overlay of conceptualisation.
To find separation I have to be conscious, and to be conscious I have to be aware of something. So consciousness or the whole experience as it is now, is the product of the union of something and awareness.
Yes, but this does not imply that there is awareness OF something that is separate from this experience. What you are doing is stating that there is no-self but then you are substituting it with another entity - this time awareness. Try to find this awareness that is aware of something that is separate - can you find it in your own direct experience?
I am the experience nothing to divide nothing to unite.
But in the experience the somethings are constantly changing, but something remains unchanging.
That unchanging backgroud is who I am, and all the change takes place on it.
Like a movie screen the screen remains the same, only pictures changes, yet all that changing is a part of screen not the separate thing from the screen, but for the sake of explanation I am separating it.
Yes, there is only this experience - nothing to divide or unite. I do agree with "the unchanging background is who I am", but where is the separation of the movie (this experience) and the screen (the background). Aren't you, at the same time, also the movie?
In a dream, I am not just the little guy talking and flying or doing whatever, in the dream, I am the whole dream.
Is this any different in "real life"? Aren't YOU the whole life?

User avatar
Nameless1995
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 6:13 pm

Re: Who is writing this thing?

Postby Nameless1995 » Mon May 26, 2014 7:36 pm

So when I experienced the no self, I was in some form of silent observer mode and the sense of self had disappeared. But I had read something more happens if the experience continues, the merging of experience and experiencer and bla bla, but nothing happened, no shift happened in my mind at that time.
So I said I guess I stopped the experience, I came out.
You are talking about an I that experiences. What is this I, this entity? Can you find it in direct experience?
What is "my mind"? Any more than thoughts appearing saying that this entity that is experiencing is "I/self"?
Is there an entity "thinker"?
When you touch a crow you encounter a sensation, when you smell it you receive a different sensation, when you hear the crow’s voice, it is a different experience.
Yes, true, but is there a "you" that receives these sensations? Can you find this entity besides thought stating that there is one?
Those are different aspects of the same one crow, but still you cannot deny that they are different, separate and distinct aspects even though they are the aspects of the ’one’ crow.
Are you sure? What is this "one crow"? When you look at this crow is it any more than just some black colour in a certain shape? When you hear it, is it any thing than simply sound? When you touch it does it feel like "a crow" or is there simply pressure? What is "crow" if not just a concept compiled by thought?
Again I can classify a tree as a different object than a crow. You cannot just deny the difference.
Yes, you can classify... but what classifies? Is this classification based on direct experience or this just thought telling you that there is a tree and there is a crow and they are different?
I can just view the whole totality as one system, and say all are parts of it.
What views this totality? Is there a subject looking at a multitude of objects? If there is no subject (no entity "I"), can there be objects?
But these are all just mere plays of words. Both separation and unity are two angles of perception, neither of them is perfectly true or false
Yes, both separation and unity are just concepts, but we need concepts otherwise there would be no communication possible... I see your point with the two angles of perception, but there really is only one. The second angle is not really pure perception/experiencing anymore but an overlay of conceptualisation.
To find separation I have to be conscious, and to be conscious I have to be aware of something. So consciousness or the whole experience as it is now, is the product of the union of something and awareness.
Yes, but this does not imply that there is awareness OF something that is separate from this experience. What you are doing is stating that there is no-self but then you are substituting it with another entity - this time awareness. Try to find this awareness that is aware of something that is separate - can you find it in your own direct experience?
I am the experience nothing to divide nothing to unite.
But in the experience the somethings are constantly changing, but something remains unchanging.
That unchanging backgroud is who I am, and all the change takes place on it.
Like a movie screen the screen remains the same, only pictures changes, yet all that changing is a part of screen not the separate thing from the screen, but for the sake of explanation I am separating it.
Yes, there is only this experience - nothing to divide or unite. I do agree with "the unchanging background is who I am", but where is the separation of the movie (this experience) and the screen (the background). Aren't you, at the same time, also the movie?
In a dream, I am not just the little guy talking and flying or doing whatever, in the dream, I am the whole dream.
Is this any different in "real life"? Aren't YOU the whole life?
The DIRECT EXPERIENCE itself is the AWARENESS.
I experienced and I was the experience and I am the experiencing.

Anyway how can the experiencer be even found?
It is impossible.
How can anyone see their face without reflecting.
The experiencer we project and think we are is a distorted reflection.
Perciever cant be percieved, all that we can percieve of the perciever is the perception itself.
The perception is the perceiver.
I am life.

the crow concept was just too show how these concepts are meaningless in really understanding anything and they are
only for communication.

I am the life?

it depends on what 'I' points too?

The I is a game of semantics.

What am i supposed to call as 'I'?

Why will I not call the thoughts as I? Why not? Even though they just come and go.
Why not call the unconscious mind me too?

We were just made to form a vague sense of 'I' by the CULTure, we were treated as separate individual being,

and we never questioned, we took it,

I am typing yet I am not thinking? Who is typing? A machine? What is this machine supposed to do?
Just go on doing its usual mechanical works, no?

Just experience and nothing more can be found.

User avatar
Nameless1995
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 6:13 pm

Re: Who is writing this thing?

Postby Nameless1995 » Mon May 26, 2014 7:41 pm

In a dream, I am not just the little guy talking and flying or doing whatever, in the dream, I am the whole dream.
Is this any different in "real life"? Aren't YOU the whole life?
*whole perceived life.
Yes I used the dream thing as an analogy to real life.
Both are experiences nothing more. The same thing.
Just set of experiences.

User avatar
Alexw
Posts: 1364
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2014 5:50 am

Re: Who is writing this thing?

Postby Alexw » Mon May 26, 2014 9:11 pm

The DIRECT EXPERIENCE itself is the AWARENESS.
I experienced and I was the experience and I am the experiencing.
Anyway how can the experiencer be even found?
It is impossible.
Yes, there is no separation between being aware of the experience and the experience. And yes, its impossible to find the experiencer as there is no separate experiencer.
But still there is awareness of this experience (it is known), right? So what is knowing the experience that is not separate from it?
I am typing yet I am not thinking? Who is typing? A machine? What is this machine supposed to do? Just go on doing its usual mechanical works, no?
Yes, is there any one typing? If so, who? The body? The mind? Or is "typing" just a "selective set out of this experience" that mind labels typing and that YOU (not a person) are aware of?
Yes I used the dream thing as an analogy to real life.
Both are experiences nothing more. The same thing. Just set of experiences.
Yep :-)

User avatar
Nameless1995
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 6:13 pm

Re: Who is writing this thing?

Postby Nameless1995 » Mon May 26, 2014 10:39 pm


Yes, there is no separation between being aware of the experience and the experience. And yes, its impossible to find the experiencer as there is no separate experiencer.
But still there is awareness of this experience (it is known), right? So what is knowing the experience that is not separate from it?
Only one attribute of experiencer i.e experience is experienced, other attributes are as impossible to find as eating my mouth with my mouth. Can you see your own face without reflecting? Does that mean there is no face?
Awareness of experience?
Isn't experience itself awareness?
Yes, is there any one typing? If so, who? The body? The mind? Or is "typing" just a "selective set out of this experience" that mind labels typing and that YOU (not a person) are aware of?

Its autotyping, I am always autotyping, I am channeling ghosts, just kidding. But its still all auto.

User avatar
Nameless1995
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 6:13 pm

Re: Who is writing this thing?

Postby Nameless1995 » Mon May 26, 2014 10:48 pm

who is typing? Thoughts? Where are the thought? There are not even thoughts? So instant, so fast...
How can I write so much without thinking?
Who is writing?
Ye nothing new noticing this strange stuffs since months.
Who is walking, after walking, no one walking,
who scratches the head, does this, does that? It all just happens.


But if there is no self, no one, no one to awaken or sleep, then what is going on here? who is guided? Who is guiding?
Who gets freed from suffering then? Who is it then attains peace?

Who is it the wrongly identify and clings to the self, names and forms? Who gets deluded and who gets enlightened?
If no one, then why all these?

User avatar
Nameless1995
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 6:13 pm

Re: Who is writing this thing?

Postby Nameless1995 » Mon May 26, 2014 11:05 pm

Does the story making mind stops?
But to whom does it even makes story?
To whom does the mind presents with story and deludes?
To itself?
Then the illusion is deluded of the illusion.
That is the self is deluded that the self exists?
So liberation is suicide?
But what remains when the story suicides?
What is it?

Even consciounsess is flux as it depends on something to be conscious of and all somethings are in flux.
Without a mind with interconnected informations, thoughts and such, and stuff produced from sensations,
there can be no consciousness.

All in flux, where am I? I am the flux. I am the everything. Just semantics again.

What now? What to realize?

User avatar
Nameless1995
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 6:13 pm

Re: Who is writing this thing?

Postby Nameless1995 » Mon May 26, 2014 11:20 pm

‘Who am I?’ I asked myself. Am I the body? The combination of head, legs, hands, and all that? But if I cut out my hand, will I not still remain? Or is the ‘I’ different if I amputate my legs and hands? My whole form survives due to the co-ordination of different organs within my body. Critical deformation may happen, if one organ stops working correctly. Different parts of the body works together as one to create THE ONE ‘I’. But if I analyze this with a bigger perspective, it appears to me, that the whole universe works with the body, to keep me as me. For me to be me, I need to breath air from the surrounding, intake food from the nature and I need sunlight and heat and everything. The whole universe co-ordinates to form 'me', just like different organs co-ordinates. I am not just an isolated body. So the same logic that I use to call my body as my body, can also be used to say that the whole universe is my body. I am the product of crisscrossing of universal resources. I am the universe experiencing itself.

But am I the body? I may be dependent on the oxygen to survive. But that does not mean I am the oxygen. I may be dependent on the lungs and the heart but that does not imply that I am the heart or the lungs.

Am I the brain, then? Am I the brain, or am I the product of the complex processes happening in the brain? Or is there even a brain in me? How can I know with 100% certainty? I merely read all that in some school books. I heard about these things in the mouths of the society. Even if I myself become a brain surgeon, and validate the presence of a brain by cutting it out from someone's head, will it really validate if there is any brain within MY body? It will only confirm the brain had been in the body of the subject. He was a human. He had brain. Every human is found to have a brain. I am a human too. And therefore, I must have a brain too. But this is just inductive reasoning. How can I know for sure? For now, I will just acknowledge the presence of the brain. So, am I the brain or am I the one created by the functions of the brain?

And when in past I was at this moment of contemplation, I noticed something. I noticed that I had been moving and I had been scratching the back of my head. Then, I walked in the room and then I observed a prism. But all this time, I was completely absorbed in thoughts. Who was doing all those activities? Why had I been doing all that? I never intended to do that. Then why? Then who? Then how? Those were all reflexive action.


If I come to think of it, I had been doing this type of things all my life but I never noticed until then. I had never looked at it so critically. I never stopped to think about this. Why? How does it feel like I am doing this, I am doing that, when clearly I am not? I am not consciously doing that, and it never appears strange. All these inconsistencies gets avoided by the mind making it all appear so smooth that no doubt ever arises. May be some backward rationalization is involved in this. I had heard how the unconscious mind makes decisions almost 6 seconds before even the conscious mind is aware of it.

So what does that mean? Are all these Mechanistic? Am I just a complex program? A machine? But what is the unconscious mind. Where is it? What exactly it is? Is it me? Or not me? What makes it 'my' unconscious mind? What is a mind?


So is there no free will? Are these all just conditioned and unconditioned reflexes and programming? I asked myself: Where are you in all this, me? Where are you, me? Then I went on thinking: but how does all these inconsistencies add up? How does the ‘I’ come into being?


Since birth the mind computer is treated as an individual being, as an ‘I’, as somebody and it all influenced me to form up an image of I. It all seems so obvious, every moment, the society works to maintain this image of I. We are so caught up in the distraction, so caught up in the trivialities of life, that we never stop to think what is the thing that this image of ‘I’ even represents? It represents nothing. People use identities, names, careers, social status, appearances, tastes, families, home etc. to define the ‘I’, to strengthen the image of ‘I’, but all of those are just superficial identities. They are mere attributes of the image.


Let’s throw away all these superficial identities for now, and dive much deeper into the core of the self. Ok, so there are these unconscious reflexive actions. But that may be based on my own inner nature, that is, me myself. Isn’t the unconscious mind still me?

Well, but I can also act from my conscious will. If I want to punch the wall, I can go and then punch it. I, from my own deliberate will, can punch that wall. So I can choose to take control whenever I want by becoming more aware. I had heard how at the time of many irrational behaviors like getting angry and expressing it, we are not really aware of it. It is reflexive and mindless but the mind later backward rationalizes and creates a false story to explain such behaviors. The mind is the greatest deceiver. But if we only learn to grow some awareness at those moments we can choose how to react, we can choose if we will react with anger or not. So awareness is control, awareness gives us power.


Yet the unconscious mind is also an expert. It keeps our heart beating smoothly, it keeps our nose breathing and all that. It can do things much better than consciousness, but consciousness can take control and change and condition the unconscious reflexive processes. At the first moments of using a keyboard, I was slow, I had to look at every key while typing, I had to give conscious effort, but with time, typing got conditioned in my mind, and now I can do much more easily without any conscious effort, almost subconsciously. There is no talent that cannot be grown in this way through practice. A self-admitted hopeless student in math, turned into a human calculator. The mind is much more powerful that one may think. Also with developing our awareness we can be more than just a sheep, we can be more immune to external conditionings, marketing and all that, and we can think for ourselves, we can be a more independent and more human than just a mindless robot running on external conditionings.


But then so I have free will? Not so soon. From where does this ‘will’ arise then? I willed to punch the wall, but why was the will was to punch the world, not the door? Aren't several of my wills dependent on the external stimuli? I looked at that ice scream. It looked tasty and so I bought it. External stimuli provoked that will in me to buy the ice cream. To gain a social status, recognition, we do all types of things. We train, we study and a lot of these actions are just for external confirmation and recognition. Something the mind needs for survival process. But aren't these all then just a programmed process? All based on hardcoded desires? Even within all the diversities that we have, we share a lot of common goals. Most of us are attracted towards the same basic things in life. Only our ways of attainment is different.


: At one moment, I looked at the wall. An image in my head appeared telling me to kick it. Why? How? Out of nowhere that image came. Who puts all that in me? Why am I supposed to kick it? Why am I supposed to have such a thought? These type of random thoughts occurs all the time. Some months ago, as I was getting sleepy and a strange music appeared in my thought. But I don't even listen to music much. How did it happen? From where did it come? As I got even sleepier, the mind started to run amok, several thoughts started to run, consciousness became dimmer. There then remained no strict consciousness to be aware of what is being thought, but still enough consciousness to be aware something is being thought. And slowly, slowly, the thoughts created a world, a dream, and consciousness woke up in a different world, the world of dreams. Who does all this? Can ‘I’ say that ‘I’ do these when clearly ‘I’ don't do it consciously? What do I even mean as I use the word 'I', all this time?


Thoughts....who is thinking all these thoughts? I thought: "I am thinking." But as I started to think that "I am thinking", I already knew that I was going to think "I am thinking" before even completing the thinking, but if I knew then that must mean my thought had been completed even before starting it. But how?


If I analyze this phenomenon more deeply I find big thoughts to appear just as a simple instant feeling or sense just like a blink and then I repeat the thought by expanding the instant sense, more like decoding it, but I already know what it is. So there is a kind of double thought process. A repetition. But why? Why do I do this? Do I do this to maintain an illusion that I am in charge of thinking when thoughts just appears out of nowhere? Just like that image of kicking the wall. It just appeared. 'Just'. But from where does this intuitive sense really appear? Do I again come back to the unconscious mind? Are the conscious thoughts actually rooted in the unconscious? So where is truly the ‘I’? Where are you, I?

So is there some non-corporeal substance behind all these? The soul? The thinker of thoughts, the doer of deed and the true source of ‘I’? The true self? But then what exactly is the soul? Why there needs to be something behind all these? How does the soul explain all the inconsistencies of the 'I'? Is the soul something that has its own special personality that works through me, then? But that cannot be, because I am not the persona, I must be beyond persona, because if I want I can change my persona, so I must the impersonal power behind, that can change the persona. Isn’t the soul just a loosely defined abstraction?


Then I realized, that I am the pure impersonal awareness behind it all.


The ‘me’ that thinks me to be me, the image of the self that I had, was just an image, just a sense; nothing more. The 'I' that I perceive to be the perceiver, cannot be the perceiver because the very act of perceiving it shows it is just a perception yet there is no perceiver, and there is only the perception and I am the whole perception. The perception of the perceiver is just a distorted reflection.


Soul or body, whatever there is or not, there is consciousness.


The perceived sense of 'I' itself does not have a consciousness, but there is a consciousness of the sense of 'I'. The thoughts and actions, all are mechanistic. I am not really thinking, or doing but there is consciousness of thoughts, consciousness of sensations, consciousness of actions etc.


Rapidly changing states of minds flowing in the stream of consciousness are all culminating to form the 'I'. The states and senses, and thoughts are discontinuous, but continuous awareness fills the discontinuity, making it smooth. So it is just a delusional image of self that suffers from excruciation, trauma, agony and pain, and enjoys jubilance, happiness and pleasure. But there is only impersonal consciousness. There is just consciousness of suffering. There is just consciousness of agony. There is just consciousness of an ‘I’ suffering from suffering. The continuous impersonal consciousness fills the gaps in between the rapidly changing distinct states of mind and creates the personified ‘I’.


But this sense of the presence of the fixed personal entity behind the sense of I is just an illusion and in place of a personal entity, there is mere void.


The States of mind can change drastically. The ‘I’ may love X today but tomorrow the ‘I’ may get bored of X and hate X even though X did not do anything worthy of hatred. States can change out of nowhere. Life itself is change, transiency, insecurity, dynamism.


The sense of self for which so many things are done is in the end only a sense and nothing more. The mind is nothing but a culmination of habits and memories with incredibly complex mechanisms involved, and works largely depending on the external stimuli, impulses and conditionings. Millions of neurons are working together in a vast network to create the sense of one ‘I’. The mental sense of a continuous self is the greatest delusion. You die every second. Dislikes, likes, belief, personality anything can change any minute. In an accident you can lose your mind and turn lunatic. Any continuity of this sense of mental self is an illusion. I myself have changed so drastically so many times. The self is a mechanistic process. But consciousness is something else. Consciousness is the thing that is merely conscious of the process.


Through interaction with the environment a human child slowly grows a delusional sense of distinct separate self and this sense changes all the rules. Without the sense of self, consciousness will not be as we know it. It adds an extra dimension to consciousness by acting as a reflection, albeit a distorted one. But this is the thing that is actually responsible for all sufferings and miseries. Who is there to suffer if the ‘I’ is an illusion?


The perceived ‘I’, It is a role, kind of like an actor in a stage for drama. Sometimes, we get too lost within the role, that we forget that the ‘I’ that we think ourselves are, does not really exist behind the appearance.

But am I consciousness?
Then who am I when I am asleep in dreamless slumber?
Even consciousness is a state of flux as it is dependent on information, highly interconnected porcessing information(mind) to be conscious of.

visual consciousness is not me, as if it is removed, I remain.
auditory consciousness same as above.
Touch consciousness the same.
Taste consciousness the same.
Thoughts imaginations and feeling associated consciosness the same too.

So I can remove them all.

When all is removed, what remains?

Nothing. Pure nothing.

There is no independent entity.

Just the experience formed by different perceptions.

What more?

User avatar
Alexw
Posts: 1364
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2014 5:50 am

Re: Who is writing this thing?

Postby Alexw » Tue May 27, 2014 11:04 am

Who is walking, after walking, no one walking, who scratches the head, does this, does that? It all just happens.
But if there is no self, no one, no one to awaken or sleep, then what is going on here? who is guided? Who is guiding?
Who gets freed from suffering then? Who is it then attains peace?
Who is it the wrongly identify and clings to the self, names and forms? Who gets deluded and who gets enlightened?
If no one, then why all these?
Yes, who is doing anything... no entity doing anything.
To whom does the mind presents with story and deludes?
To itself? Then the illusion is deluded of the illusion.
What is the illusion? Any more than simply thought stating that there is an I, a subject separate to objects? Is there a receiver of thought that could be deluded? Or is there only a never ending chain of thought, in its continuity producing a rather convincing story of I, me and others?

So... I really liked your last post - many questions and also many good answers!
Is it all boils down to the last part:
But am I consciousness?
Then who am I when I am asleep in dreamless slumber?
Even consciousness is a state of flux as it is dependent on information, highly interconnected porcessing information(mind) to be conscious of.

visual consciousness is not me, as if it is removed, I remain.
auditory consciousness same as above.
Touch consciousness the same.
Taste consciousness the same.
Thoughts imaginations and feeling associated consciosness the same too.

So I can remove them all.
When all is removed, what remains?
Nothing. Pure nothing.
There is no independent entity.
Just the experience formed by different perceptions.
Most people see this world in wich we live as something external, full of objects that are separate from themselves. They then see the senses as a gateway to their own body where a mind cognises and processes perception. Behind all that is ones consciousness - a bit of a black box.
Now try to reverse this situation. What if consciousness is "everywhere" and the mind is "contained" by this consciousness. Inside of the mind all objects arise. Obviously this is a concept (there really is no in or outside etc) but never mind - its just a picture we are drawing.
Does consciousness require mind to be? Or does it exist with or without mind (=thoughts)? Without "mind" is there space or time? Is there perception of experience possible without the extension of it into space and time? Are there any objects (or subject) without mind.
In scenario 1 there are many subjects all observing many objects. In scenario 2 there is only 1 subject and this subject is the "substratum" for mind and mind is the "substratum" for objects to arise in space and time.

So who are you in deep sleep? Is there anything else but pure consciousness? What is a reality or a dream? Consciousness "in flux" as you call it... is this maybe what the mind is? Where do objects (incl. your body etc) come from if not from the "mind" cutting up THIS experience into I, other, objects..?

Is THIS experience formed by different perceptions or is THIS really without any division? Only thought stating that there is separation. If this would be the current experience: "98475bf8urgtefbru8thrif4u8hrgnbgu8t4hgiurtngu5" and then thought states that it really is "GreenSoundPressureGreenGreenBrownSoundPressure" and then the next thought states that this is "me walking on grass" - is the experience formed by this process or is this process only an interpretation? What is "me" if not only an identification with an interpretation of a part of THIS - a part that does not exist except in the analytical process of thought --> mistaken identity?

User avatar
Nameless1995
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 6:13 pm

Re: Who is writing this thing?

Postby Nameless1995 » Tue May 27, 2014 9:14 pm

So Buddha mind + informations = our consciousness = blah blah blah all useless theories.

May be the buddha mind is also impermanent. May be the buddha mind is just some potential field of consciousness created by the brain.

Now where is me in all these?

What do I mean by me? It is just a word.

Well I guess it is more of a collective noun. There is no one thing to call the self, but a collective of some stuffs.
Well is just a game of naming, this computer is me, le, who cares?

I don't think I am here since a couple of months, I can't really sense me that much.I am pretty much voided out.

May be it is not that I am not having no-self experience, but I am having in 24/7 and I am so used to it that I can't realize, there is no distinct 'I' to realize.

Since the long time I am lost in the Void.

My memories are distorted. I tried to remember the no-self experience the only one I could remember and it has contradictory properties. I think it didnt happen as far back as I think, I guess it happened, 2 years ago.
And that was when a shift was going on. I lost myself in video games. I stopped caring. I found something, an inner void, an inner silence that never suffers, the ultimate haven, nirvana or whatever who cares?

I think I know why the state seems familiar. I think it was where I always was, when I was born. It was my natural state. I was one with experience. We are all born enlightened.

It all boils down to one sentence: All just experience. No complex stuff, no buddha mind, no suddha mind,
there is just experience, no I, no he, yes I , yes he, whatever who cares, just experience.

And nothing else can be experienced.

I achieved madlightenment.


Return to “ARCHIVES”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest