I was on a mission today to REALLY look deeply at this. Every time the witness showed up I couldn’t find any “thing” other than the seeing or witnessing. Then there was a realization that the witness perspective is also only a thought that has a subtle way of pretending to be removed from experience. The more I sat with this it struck me that ALL experience is only known through thought. Without thought, there is no division whatsoever. And since there is no witness, then nothing can even be known. So in that sense even AE of sensations or hearing or seeing isn’t happening because how could that be known? When there’s nothing to divide, nothing can be said at all. Wow, that has major implications here.EVERY TIME when the witness shows up, just LOOK and SEE if there is really a witness there. LOOK again and again and again. Hundreds of times a day. The more you look, the easier it gets. At some point looking will happen naturally without effort.
it also seems like all ways of the “mind”- any thoughts that arise are all conditioned in a really macro sense- like all existence creates a thought. It come out of nowhere but really it’s just a massive, impersonal playing out of endless patterns and conditioning.Taking the self as real, is also a conditioned habit of thinking. It’s a habit of the ‘mind’. It’s the result of a life-long conditioning. But upon each looking it gets a little bit weaker and weaker. So further looking is the key.
Sorry about all my massive expectations, all these notions about enlightenment from spiritual teachers has really distorted things. I feel like that’s why it can be so challenging for me to separate what we’re doing here from ordinary reality. But I definitely see what you mean, and how seeing through the self has nothing to do with appearances.”An ability to accept absolutely everything that appears- and in that there’s no one doing the accepting.”l
Huge expectation again. The ability or the lack of ability to accept things as they are, is rooted in the personality, in emotional issues. These won’t go away just because it’s seen that there is no self doing it. These will need lots of further looking. Seeing through the self is just the first step. Just the beginning, and not the end.
When I look, I see the “decision to look” and the looking. But beyond both of those, there is no one doing it. The idea that there was a decision is a thought and I also see that the looking itself is a subtle thought that positioning itself as looking. But it’s really just an empty concept. So the “I” just arises with all thoughts since thought content isn’t an actual experience so it automatically creates the illusion of an “I” that’s separate.K: “I can’t see an entity inside me being a seer or doer. But I perceive seeing and doing. But when that is broken down further I see thoughts about seeing and doing which are just thoughts that can’t actually see or do.”
Good. And what about the ‘I’ in the above sentences?
It’s all just thoughts! I’m really seeing that now!What is it that can’t see an entity inside itself?
What is that perceives seeing and doing?
What is it that sees thoughts about seeing and doing?
yes, I see this. Saying they come and go from nothing would be another concept.Here are some statements based on our investigation so far. Please read them careful, and see if you are clear on them. If any of them are not totally clear, please let me know.
- In actual experience thoughts don’t come and go from anywhere. They just there when they are there. And when they are not there anymore, then they are just simply not there.
Yes, I see this. Because every time “I” think I can create a thought, change a thought, stop a thought- it’s all just more thoughts. No me that has power over thoughts can be found except in thought content.- The supposed ‘me’ has no power over thoughts. None.
- Thoughts just appear on their own, without anyone or anything doing it.
Yes, because any “doing” that is seen is a thought.
Yep, same as above.- There is nothing that is thinking thoughts. Thinking happens, or rather say thoughts appear but without a thinker. There is no thinker of thoughts.
I see that thoughts can’t think but what about thoughts having an effect on the body? Or like Masuru Emotos water experiments where thoughts were seen to have a physical effect on the water molecule structure. Or mass prayer. That’s more than just thought content isn’t it?- Thoughts have no power whatsoever. They cannot think or do anything.
Yes, they cannot actually “do” their content. But I’m still a little stuck on the physical connection.- Thoughts have no volition. There might be thoughts about intentions, but not the thoughts themselves intending or wanting it. They just ‘talk’ about wanting or intending.
I see this within “my” thoughts, but if there is no “container” as such, why are our thoughts personal to a large extent? We can’t know everyone’s thoughts who we pass on the street.- In actual experience there is not even a mind. There might be thoughts about a ‘mind’, but ‘mind’ as such cannot be found.