Help Me Please!!

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
Vivien
Posts: 2729
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Help Me Please!!

Postby Vivien » Mon Jul 22, 2019 1:17 am

Hi Brenda,
These are both very clear. I see the thought and the sound. period.
Good.
What is actually appearing is sound which thought then overlays with a story about the sound being the fridge.
So what is known is sound + thoughts, however a fridge in actual experience is not known.
Is this totally clear?

Let’s try the following experiment to help make what is being pointed at, clearer.

We are looking at the raw experience labelled as sound and ignoring the thought ABOUT what the sound is as described by thought.

For this experiment you will need to sit yourself near a clock that has an audible second hand. If you don’t have a ticking clock, then here is a link to a clock on Youtube. Do this experiment several times.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=al3Xt8YnGE0

Take in a couple of deep breaths and close your eyes.

Listen to the sound. “Tick tock tick tock tick tock tick tock”

Focus on the tick tock. Attune to the sound itself. IGNORE all verbal and visual thoughts about what seems to be creating the sound.

Try to find the clock.

Going just by the tick tock sound, do you find a clock present?
Is there any direct/actual experience of a clock in the sound?

Does the sound come self-labelled as originating from the clock?

Do you find a clock hidden in the sound?
Do you find a clock beyond the sound?

In your direct/actual experience of the sound, do you find any evidence that the sound is caused by a clock?
What do you find?


Allow your eyes to open.

Were you able to establish that in your direct/actual experience of the tick tock sound, that there was a clock?

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
Brenda
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:34 am

Re: Help Me Please!!

Postby Brenda » Mon Jul 22, 2019 6:34 pm

To start out, it is funny, random people are saying to me: "Don't you see ?" I never noticed anybody ever say that to me, and today 3 people said it to me already.

Anyway,
What is actually appearing is sound which thought then overlays with a story about the sound being the fridge.
So what is known is sound + thoughts, however a fridge in actual experience is not known.
Is this totally clear?
Clear

Focus on the tick tock. Attune to the sound itself. IGNORE all verbal and visual thoughts about what seems to be creating the sound.

Try to find the clock.

Going just by the tick tock sound, do you find a clock present?
There is no clock present, only the sound plus the thought.

As I have been doing this sound exercise many times now, the label thought does not appear as quickly.
In the clock exercise, I heard the sound, and a thought came up "this is a clock", then quickly another thought arises "what is this sound"? and as I did not believe the content of these thoughts, more thoughts came questioning the sound. When I continued to not believe the contents of the thought, the thoughts stopped coming, and I felt an expansion of the sound.
Is this what is described as the phenomenon?


Is there any direct/actual experience of a clock in the sound?
There is no clock in the direct experience. Only the sound and the experience of the thought.
Does the sound come self-labelled as originating from the clock?
the sound does NOT come self-labelled as no sounds do. There are thoughts that try to label the sound, but if we do not believe the contents, then it does not exist. The clock is not part of the direct experience.
Do you find a clock hidden in the sound?
I do not see a clock at all.
Do you find a clock beyond the sound?
I do not see a clock beyond the sound.
In your direct/actual experience of the sound, do you find any evidence that the sound is caused by a clock?
What do you find?
I do not see a clock, cannot find a clock, just the sound and the thought. There is no clock in the AE.
Allow your eyes to open.
Were you able to establish that in your direct/actual experience of the tick tock sound, that there was a clock?
No, there was no clock in the AE.
The belief that there is a clock would be a thought overlay. The clock does not exist and I could not find the clock in the experience or beyond the experience.

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 2729
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Help Me Please!!

Postby Vivien » Tue Jul 23, 2019 12:09 am

Hi Brenda,
To start out, it is funny, random people are saying to me: "Don't you see ?" I never noticed anybody ever say that to me, and today 3 people said it to me already.
You see, you have to see! :)
As I have been doing this sound exercise many times now, the label thought does not appear as quickly.
In the clock exercise, I heard the sound, and a thought came up "this is a clock", then quickly another thought arises "what is this sound"? and as I did not believe the content of these thoughts, more thoughts came questioning the sound. When I continued to not believe the contents of the thought, the thoughts stopped coming, and I felt an expansion of the sound.
Is this what is described as the phenomenon?
When I say that ‘thought as a phenomenon’ I’m just trying to point out the difference between the presence of a thought [phenomenon] (as a ‘container’), and the what the thought is about (‘content’).
the sound does NOT come self-labelled as no sounds do. There are thoughts that try to label the sound, but if we do not believe the contents, then it does not exist. The clock is not part of the direct experience.
I’m not sure I get what you mean by: “then it does not exist”.

Let’s say, there is a thought present “this is the sound of a clock”.

Do you say if the content of the above thought is not believed then the clock doesn’t exist?
But when the content of a thought is believed, then the clock does exist?

What would be a more precise description of experience: ‘The content of a thought doesn’t exist’, or ‘the content of a thought is an imagination, a fantasy’?
V: In your direct/actual experience of the sound, do you find any evidence that the sound is caused by a clock?
What do you find?
B: I do not see a clock, cannot find a clock, just the sound and the thought. There is no clock in the AE.
You didn’t reply to an important part of the question:
Do you find any evidence that the sound is caused by a clock?

So what is known is label + colour + sound + thoughts ABOUT the clock, but the thoughts about the clock are pointing to further thought, because a clock is not known. Is this clear?


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
Brenda
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:34 am

Re: Help Me Please!!

Postby Brenda » Tue Jul 23, 2019 12:49 am

the sound does NOT come self-labelled as no sounds do. There are thoughts that try to label the sound, but if we do not believe the contents, then it does not exist. The clock is not part of the direct experience.
I’m not sure I get what you mean by: “then it does not exist”
.
Let me say it a different way.
the sound does NOT come self-labelled as no sounds do. There are thoughts that try to label the sound, but if we do not believe the contents, then the story cannot unfold. There may be a clock, but the clock is not part of the actual experience.
Let’s say, there is a thought present “this is the sound of a clock”.

Do you say if the content of the above thought is not believed then the clock doesn’t exist?
But when the content of a thought is believed, then the clock does exist?
I am saying that if I do not believe the contents of the thought, then the story of a clock cannot unfold. The belief in the content of the thought is what allows the story to unfold. When I did not believe that the sound was a clock, other thoughts rose up questioning the sound, what it could be, etc. When the thoughts were experienced, but I did not believe the content of the thought, the thoughts eventually stopped arising, the sound seemed louder, and I had a feeling of connection to the sound. As if there was no body, or no visible lines between me and the sound, as we were connected. I looked for the sound, and couldn't find the sound either inside me or outside of me, but I knew it was there as I can here it.
What would be a more precise description of experience: ‘The content of a thought doesn’t exist’, or ‘the content of a thought is an imagination, a fantasy’?
The content is an imagination.
Do you find any evidence that the sound is caused by a clock?
No I did not.
So what is known is label + colour + sound + thoughts ABOUT the clock, but the thoughts about the clock are pointing to further thought, because a clock is not known. Is this clear?
no this is not clear.
If I do not believe the contents of the thought this is a clock then how do I know it is a clock. I did not find a clock so how do I know it is really a clock? It could be something else.
How do I know the color? The color of what? I did not find a clock so how do I know the color?
I do know the sound and the thought about the clock.
Guidance please.

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 2729
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Help Me Please!!

Postby Vivien » Tue Jul 23, 2019 8:02 am

Hi Brenda,
V: So what is known is label + colour + sound + thoughts ABOUT the clock, but the thoughts about the clock are pointing to further thought, because a clock is not known. Is this clear?
B: no this is not clear.
If I do not believe the contents of the thought this is a clock then how do I know it is a clock. I did not find a clock so how do I know it is really a clock? It could be something else.
How do I know the color? The color of what? I did not find a clock so how do I know the color?
I do know the sound and the thought about the clock.
AE is: sound, image/color, smell, taste, sensation, thought (but not the content)

So if you worked with an actual clock then there was an image/color labelled by thoughts as ‘clock’.
But the image/color labelled by thoughts as ‘clock’ is NOT the AE of clock, but the AE of image/color only.
Is this clear now?
I am saying that if I do not believe the contents of the thought, then the story of a clock cannot unfold.
“if I don’t believe the contents of thoughts” – what does the word ‘I’ point to in this sentence?
What is it EXACTLY that is believing or not believing the contents of thoughts?
Where is this ‘I’ exactly? – find the exact location

When the thoughts were experienced, but I did not believe the content of the thought, the thoughts eventually stopped arising, the sound seemed louder, and I had a feeling of connection to the sound. As if there was no body, or no visible lines between me and the sound, as we were connected. I looked for the sound, and couldn't find the sound either inside me or outside of me, but I knew it was there as I can here it.
“no visible lines between me and the sound, as we were connected” – so you are saying that there is a ‘me’ that connected to the sound.

Where is this ‘me’ EXACTLY?
Don’t just think about it, but actually SEARCH FOR this ‘me’. Where is its exact location?

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
Brenda
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:34 am

Re: Help Me Please!!

Postby Brenda » Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:55 am

So if you worked with an actual clock then there was an image/color labelled by thoughts as ‘clock’.
But the image/color labelled by thoughts as ‘clock’ is NOT the AE of clock, but the AE of image/color only.
Is this clear now?
Ah I see what you mean. I did not have an actual clock, I listened to your recording, so no color as no actual clock.
But yes, if if there was a clock then this would be correct.
“if I don’t believe the contents of thoughts” – what does the word ‘I’ point to in this sentence?
What is it EXACTLY that is believing or not believing the contents of thoughts?
Where is this ‘I’ exactly? – find the exact location
Good question, I look for "I" but cannot find it anywhere. Not inside or outside. There is no I anywhere, so they I ask, if there is no I then who is doing the believing or not believing and I can't find anything there doing that either. It seems to be determined by focus or intention, but then who is doing that? I don't find anything or anybody there doing these acts they are just happening, just as our heart is beating without our involvement.
“no visible lines between me and the sound, as we were connected” – so you are saying that there is a ‘me’ that connected to the sound.

Where is this ‘me’ EXACTLY?
Don’t just think about it, but actually SEARCH FOR this ‘me’. Where is its exact location?
"Me" is just a word I used for a lack of words. As I described there seemed to be no differentiation between the experience of the thought and the sound. There is no "me".
I have searched for the "I", the "me", the one who is believing, and came up with nothing. There are none of these things in the picture. It is just happening, from nowhere that can be seen.

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 2729
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Help Me Please!!

Postby Vivien » Wed Jul 24, 2019 5:18 am

Hi Brenda,
Good question, I look for "I" but cannot find it anywhere. Not inside or outside. There is no I anywhere, so they I ask, if there is no I then who is doing the believing or not believing and I can't find anything there doing that either. It seems to be determined by focus or intention, but then who is doing that? I don't find anything or anybody there doing these acts they are just happening, just as our heart is beating without our involvement.
Good. Just keep looking for the self. Don’t be satisfied with not being able to find it and then making an intellectual conclusion that the self/me cannot be found.

You have to constantly search for it again and again. Searching, searching, searching and not finding brings about the realization.
I have searched for the "I", the "me", the one who is believing, and came up with nothing. There are none of these things in the picture. It is just happening, from nowhere that can be seen.
Good. Just keep looking.

Let’s continue with the clock and try to find a hearer...if sound is actually heard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=al3Xt8YnGE0

Sit quietly and take in a few deep breaths to let the dust settle and then focus on the experience of the tick tock sound. Set aside ALL thoughts, images, ideas throughout this experiment and just focus on the sound itself.

In 'hearing' can anything be found other than tick tock – AE of sound?
Can what is doing the hearing be found? Or is there only sound?
Is there a dividing line between ‘hearer’ AND sound? Can a ‘hearer’ be directly experienced?
What do you find?

Can a 'hearer' be found in 'what is being heard’? In other words, in your direct (actual) experience is there a hearer AND sound, or is there only AE of sound?

Can an INHERENT HEARER be found, or it is only thought that suggests that there is a hearer AND sound?

Are you ever aware of two experiences or more at 'any given time'? When sound shows up, is there a 'sound experience' and a 'knowing of sound' experience? If not, then how can the sound be known through hearing?

Also, try to locate the sensation that is seemingly being the one (the hearer) who is doing the hearing (the sense of a hearer). And investigate the sensation itself if it is really the hearer. Let me know what you find.


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
Brenda
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:34 am

Re: Help Me Please!!

Postby Brenda » Thu Jul 25, 2019 3:29 am

In 'hearing' can anything be found other than tick tock – AE of sound?
I hear the sound, but what came first the hearing of the sound, or the thought that there was a sound?
And if the thought came first, then does the sound exist or did I just believe the content of the thought?

Can what is doing the hearing be found? Or is there only sound?
This cannot be found.The more I look the less I see that I have any control over.
As I went to work today, I told myself, I was going to drive to work and not take the train. Minutes later, there I am at the train station. How did I get there? that was not what "I" wanted to do. I clearly wanted to drive. As I watched myself through out the day, who is telling me to walk. I am just walking, I don't feel any thoughts telling me to walk, I am just doing it. So if "I" am not telling this body what to do, then who is? it appears there is nothing telling anything what to do, it just happens. Thoughts just arise, and more thoughts follow it, but there seems to be nobody controlling any of it.So who is the believer of the content of the thought which starts the creation of the story. I see my thoughts contradict each other, but do not see how it is happening.
If we have no control over the content of thought, how is it decided what the next thought will be? How do we change direction or make plans if there is no control over the thought.
When I am looking and a thought arises, I had an intention to not believe the contents of the thought and then the next thought changed to question what the sound was.
For example, the first thought was "it is a clock", the second thought was " what is that sound"?

Is there a dividing line between ‘hearer’ AND sound? Can a ‘hearer’ be directly experienced?
What do you find?
I do not see a dividing line between hearer and sound. I can't even find the hearer at all.
When I have my eyes open I feel like I am this body, but when I close my eyes and look, I know longer feel connected to this body at all. I am just watching this body to as it will with no interaction from me at all.
Can a 'hearer' be found in 'what is being heard’? In other words, in your direct (actual) experience is there a hearer AND sound, or is there only AE of sound?
There is only the AE of sound. There is no hearer that I can find.
Can an INHERENT HEARER be found, or it is only thought that suggests that there is a hearer AND sound?
I still am unsure what comes first the thought or the sound. As I look, I see it can go either way depending on what my attention is on. If I am just looking with no intention, the thought seems to arise first. If I am looking with an intention to hear sound then the sound comes first.
Intention is a thought, so I conclude that the thought is coming before the sound.
Are you ever aware of two experiences or more at 'any given time'? When sound shows up, is there a 'sound experience' and a 'knowing of sound' experience? If not, then how can the sound be known through hearing?
lol, this is similar to my previous answer and yes, we can be aware of 2 experiences at the same time, the experience of the thought of the sound plus the actual sound
Also, try to locate the sensation that is seemingly being the one (the hearer) who is doing the hearing (the sense of a hearer). And investigate the sensation itself if it is really the hearer. Let me know what you find.
The hearer is the content of the thought, "I hear a sound". There is no hearer to find. The "hearer" is the content of the thought.

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 2729
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Help Me Please!!

Postby Vivien » Thu Jul 25, 2019 5:09 am

Hi Brenda,
V: In 'hearing' can anything be found other than tick tock – AE of sound?
B: I hear the sound, but what came first the hearing of the sound, or the thought that there was a sound?
And if the thought came first, then does the sound exist or did I just believe the content of the thought?
This reply is just a pure thought speculation, and has nothing to do with looking. And you didn’t answer my question at all.

Please read the questions more carefully. My questions are pointers for you where to look.
And you didn’t look there.
You just wrote about a thought speculation.
So here is the question again. Listen to the clock sound and look:

In 'hearing' can anything be found other than tick tock – AE of sound?
V: Can what is doing the hearing be found? Or is there only sound?
B: This cannot be found.The more I look the less I see that I have any control over.
If the hearer cannot be found, then how can there be a YOU who has no control over thing?
Is the supposed hearer and YOU are the same?
Isn’t the belief that YOU are the hearer?


“The more I look the less I see that I have any control over” – what does the word ‘I’ point to in this sentence?
WHAT is the “I”?
And WHERE is the ‘I’? – find the exact location
As I went to work today, I told myself, I was going to drive to work and not take the train.
“I told myself” – what does the word ‘I’ point to this sentence?
So if "I" am not telling this body what to do, then who is?
What is the ‘I’ that is not telling the body what to do?
WHERE is this ‘I’ EXACTLY? – search for it
When I am looking and a thought arises
What is it that is looking? Where is the ‘I’, the looker?
I had an intention to not believe the contents of the thought
Where is the ‘I’ that has an intention to not believe the contents of thoughts?
When I have my eyes open I feel like I am this body
WHERE is the ‘I’ that feels like it’s the body?
Where is the FEELER of the body? – find it
but when I close my eyes and look, I know longer feel connected to this body at all.
“I no longer feel connected to this body” – Where is this ‘I’ that could be connected or not connected to the body?
V: Can an INHERENT HEARER be found, or it is only thought that suggests that there is a hearer AND sound?
B: I still am unsure what comes first the thought or the sound. As I look, I see it can go either way depending on what my attention is on. If I am just looking with no intention, the thought seems to arise first. If I am looking with an intention to hear sound then the sound comes first.
Intention is a thought, so I conclude that the thought is coming before the sound.
Again, you didn’t read the question carefully, and you wrote about something else. You wrote about a thought speculation only. You did not look.

Here is the question again:
Can an INHERENT HEARER be found, or it is only thought that suggests that there is a hearer AND sound?
V: Are you ever aware of two experiences or more at 'any given time'? When sound shows up, is there a 'sound experience' and a 'knowing of sound' experience? If not, then how can the sound be known through hearing?
B: lol, this is similar to my previous answer and yes, we can be aware of 2 experiences at the same time, the experience of the thought of the sound plus the actual sound
You didn’t read my question carefully enough.

The question is about whether there are 2 things present in experience: sound + the knowing of it, or these two things are not two, but one?
V: Also, try to locate the sensation that is seemingly being the one (the hearer) who is doing the hearing (the sense of a hearer). And investigate the sensation itself if it is really the hearer. Let me know what you find.
B: The hearer is the content of the thought, "I hear a sound". There is no hearer to find. The "hearer" is the content of the thought.
Yes, but you didn’t read my question carefully. My question wasn’t about thoughts this time, it was about SENSATIONS.

Read it again, and look:

Also, try to locate the sensation that is seemingly being the one (the hearer) who is doing the hearing (the sense of a hearer). And investigate the sensation itself if it is really the hearer. Let me know what you find.


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
Brenda
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:34 am

Re: Help Me Please!!

Postby Brenda » Thu Jul 25, 2019 2:42 pm

This reply is just a pure thought speculation, and has nothing to do with looking. And you didn’t answer my question at all.

Please read the questions more carefully. My questions are pointers for you where to look.
And you didn’t look there.
You just wrote about a thought speculation.

You are correct, I fell back into speculation, sorry about that. It seems so easy to fall back.
So here is the question again. Listen to the clock sound and look:

In 'hearing' can anything be found other than tick tock – AE of sound?
The only thing that is found by listening to the tick tock is the AE of sound and the experience of the thought.
If the hearer cannot be found, then how can there be a YOU who has no control over thing?
Is the supposed hearer and YOU are the same?
Isn’t the belief that YOU are the hearer?
There is no hearer to be found, only to be noticed in the content of the thought.
The "YOU" is also just a content of thought, but does not exist.
When the content of the thought is "I have control" and it is believed then there is also a belief that "I am the hearer".
I cannot find the i,you, me or hearer, they are all contents of thought. They do not exist anywhere.

“The more I look the less I see that I have any control over” – what does the word ‘I’ point to in this sentence?
WHAT is the “I”?
And WHERE is the ‘I’? – find the exact location
There is no location for any reference to "I". This is just another thought.
When i feel i have control, this is just the content of thought that was once again believed.

[quot
e]“I told myself” – what does the word ‘I’ point to this sentence?
The "I" points to another thought that arose.
So if "I" am not telling this body what to do, then who is?
I do not see "anybody" telling the body what to do. I do not even see the thought for the body to do it, it just happens. period. Some things that happen there is a thought that arose, but some things that the body is doing, there is no awareness until there is.
What is the ‘I’ that is not telling the body what to do?
There is no "I" telling or not telling the body what to do. It appears as they are just random acts that happen.
WHERE is this ‘I’ EXACTLY? – search for it
There is no "I" to be found. I continue to search for it, but there is no place where it is found, other than in the content of a thought.
What is it that is looking? Where is the ‘I’, the looker?
There is no looker.
The looking is happening by experiencing a thought with the content that there is somebody looking.
Where is the ‘I’ that has an intention to not believe the contents of thoughts?
There is no "I" to be found. The intention to not believe the contents of thoughts is just another thought.

What i cannot see is how the the thoughts are believed or not believed. They appear to just pause when there are enough of them that are not believed.
WHERE is the ‘I’ that feels like it’s the body?
This is a belief of the content of a thought.
When i look to see this question, the first thought said "you are your body", and then it quickly went away and another thought rose up saying "no your are not".
I looked again and the first thought said "you are not your body", the next thought said "your body does not exist" and then the thoughts paused and there was just a blackness, nothingness for a time.
Where is the FEELER of the body? – find it
there is no "FEELER" in the body. The feeler is also a content of the thought. Does not exist.

“I no longer feel connected to this body” – Where is this ‘I’ that could be connected or not connected to the body?
The "I" that feels connected is the content of the thought that created a story once it was believed.
Can an INHERENT HEARER be found, or it is only thought that suggests that there is a hearer AND sound?
There is only thought that suggests that there is a hearer AND sound.
The question is about whether there are 2 things present in experience: sound + the knowing of it, or these two things are not two, but one?
There is only one thing, the knowing that there is an experience of thought with the contents of "i hear the sound".
Once i believe that that there is a sound, then the thought arises of what the sound must be, for example the clock.

Also, try to locate the sensation that is seemingly being the one (the hearer) who is doing the hearing (the sense of a hearer). And investigate the sensation itself if it is really the hearer. Let me know what you find.
If i believe that there is a hearer, there is the sensation of sound. If the thought is not believed, the sound diminishes into nothingness.

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 2729
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Help Me Please!!

Postby Vivien » Fri Jul 26, 2019 1:11 am

Hi Brenda,
V: WHERE is the ‘I’ that feels like it’s the body?
B: This is a belief of the content of a thought.
When i look to see this question, the first thought said "you are your body", and then it quickly went away and another thought rose up saying "no your are not".
I looked again and the first thought said "you are not your body", the next thought said "your body does not exist" and then the thoughts paused and there was just a blackness, nothingness for a time.
You were investigating this through thinking and looking at what thoughts say.

You have to shift your attention from thoughts to the actual body, to the sensations in the body, and LITERALLY SEARCH FOR the ‘me’. Can you see the difference?

You have literally SEARCH THROUGH the whole body from head to toe many-many times. Pay particular attention to the chest and the whole head. Search for the self in the eyes, behind the eyes, at the back of the head, the middle of the head, the top of the head, in the throat. Look everywhere. Search with closed eyes and open eyes too.

Which sensation seems to be the me?

If a sensation comes up SEEMINGLY as the residency of the self, then spend lots of time with that sensation, and investigate:

Is the sensation itself the self? Sensation = self / I?
Or is the self inside the sensation? Where exactly?
What makes this sensation ‘me’?


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
Brenda
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:34 am

Re: Help Me Please!!

Postby Brenda » Fri Jul 26, 2019 10:34 pm

You were investigating this through thinking and looking at what thoughts say.
That is true, I was listening to my thoughts. Let's try again.
You have to shift your attention from thoughts to the actual body, to the sensations in the body, and LITERALLY SEARCH FOR the ‘me’. Can you see the difference?
I see the difference. I was stuck in the thought. I look for "me" in my actual body, but i do not feel any sensations anywhere in the body. There is no "me" that is found.
You have literally SEARCH THROUGH the whole body from head to toe many-many times. Pay particular attention to the chest and the whole head. Search for the self in the eyes, behind the eyes, at the back of the head, the middle of the head, the top of the head, in the throat. Look everywhere. Search with closed eyes and open eyes too.
Which sensation seems to be the me?
I feel like i should be somewhere but i know that is just the contents of a thought. I continue to look but do not find the "me".
The sensation that seems to be me is the knowing that i exist but that is just another thought. The thought that contains the wanting to find me somewhere, to believe the thought that i exist. I do not see any other sensations of "me".


If a sensation comes up SEEMINGLY as the residency of the self, then spend lots of time with that sensation, and investigate:
Is the sensation itself the self? Sensation = self / I?
The only sense of self I can see is in the contents of the thought that i exist. I do not see any sensation pointing to a place where the self exists.

Or is the self inside the sensation? Where exactly?

What makes this sensation ‘me’?
The self is not in the sensation, only in the thought that says the self exists.

I do not see the sensation.

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 2729
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Help Me Please!!

Postby Vivien » Sat Jul 27, 2019 2:11 am

Hi Brenda,
I see the difference. I was stuck in the thought. I look for "me" in my actual body, but i do not feel any sensations anywhere in the body. There is no "me" that is found.
Seeing that none of the sensations are ‘me’ is essential. This needs to be seen hundreds of times for the belief in the self to start fall away. So just keep looking.

With looking, you always have to look afresh and never rely on memory of previous looking. Why? Because if you rely on the memory of a previous looking in a form of a thought: “I know there is no self” without actually looking afresh for a self, then in that moment the no-self is just a belief. So every time it seems like or feels like as if there were a self, but you just remind yourself with the thought “there is no self”, then you just covering up one belief (the seemingly perceived self) with another belief (there is no self).

It’s the looking and looking and looking and not finding that brings about the realization.

So every time I ask a question, you always have to look afresh, to see it again and again what is being pointed it. Can we agree on this?
The self is not in the sensation, only in the thought that says the self exists.
I do not see the sensation
What do you mean by that “I do not see the sensation”?
The only sense of self I can see is in the contents of the thought that i exist. I do not see any sensation pointing to a place where the self exists.
And what does the thought ‘I exist’ point TO?
What does the word ‘I’ point to?
Where is the ACTUAL I/me/self that the word ‘I’ points to?


Thought says that the foot is ‘down there’. So presumably you are above your foot. Where are you? Sit quietly, close your eyes, take a few breaths and locate where you feel yourself to be. Locate yourself vertically in the body, horizontally to the left or right, and depth, how far in. Feel how big you are, where you reside. Then point with a finger to ‘you’. Open your eyes, where is your finger pointing?

I often use capital letters or sometimes bolds or even colors to emphasise the importance of certain sentences or words. I’m not doing this to yell at you or show that I am frustrated with you. :) It’s not personal. It’s just my way of emphasise the importance of certain things. I put certain words in caps to guide your attention to a certain direction. I might ask: “How does the ‘I’ is FELT?” – the word ‘felt’ is in caps to point your attention to the sensations itself that are labelled as ‘I’ (and not to other aspects of the self).

I’m just telling this to you, because there’s been a client of mine who interpreted it as yelling, and felt offended. So I decided to explain this to all my clients to avoid misinterpretations.

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
Brenda
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:34 am

Re: Help Me Please!!

Postby Brenda » Sun Jul 28, 2019 3:03 am

Seeing that none of the sensations are ‘me’ is essential. This needs to be seen hundreds of times for the belief in the self to start fall away. So just keep looking.
Yep,I agree. When you told me to look for the self, and pointed me to specific spots, I kept looking and could not find the self.
I will continue to look and look and look.
So every time I ask a question, you always have to look afresh, to see it again and again what is being pointed it. Can we agree on this?
Of course.
What do you mean by that “I do not see the sensation”?
I meant I did not feel any sensation.
And what does the thought ‘I exist’ point TO?
What does the word ‘I’ point to?
Where is the ACTUAL I/me/self that the word ‘I’ points to?
I do not see any pointing to "I". It is just the content of the thought. It does not point to anything that I can find.
There is no actual self that "I" point to.
Thought says that the foot is ‘down there’. So presumably you are above your foot. Where are you? Sit quietly, close your eyes, take a few breaths and locate where you feel yourself to be. Locate yourself vertically in the body, horizontally to the left or right, and depth, how far in. Feel how big you are, where you reside. Then point with a finger to ‘you’. Open your eyes, where is your finger pointing?
I have done this many times, and I was unable to find "me" anywhere. My finger is pointing to anything because I was unable to find the self in any location.

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 2729
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Help Me Please!!

Postby Vivien » Sun Jul 28, 2019 5:43 am

Hi Brenda,
Yep,I agree. When you told me to look for the self, and pointed me to specific spots, I kept looking and could not find the self.
I will continue to look and look and look.
Yes, please do so. Continuous looking and looking is the essence of this guiding.

Now, let’s go back to look at thoughts again. I will give you the same questions as before, in smaller chunks. Please look very carefully with each question. Put aside what thoughts have to say about the matter, and only reply what can be actually seen/known from experience.

Where do thoughts come from?
Where are they going?
Can ‘you’ stop a thought in the middle?


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/


Return to “THE GATE”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests