Help seeing through self experientially

[poppyseed]

Hi Marc

Beautiful looking! There is a lot of clear seeing.
I will reply back once you've done working with all the pointers (my previous reply) so we don't go backwards and forwards between the replies. I hope this make sense to you!

Love
Rali

[seasidealive]

Hi Rali,

here is what came of the exercise:

In that moment is there anyone or anything which recognises the thought or is being aware of it?

At first it seems like something is aware of the thought. Upon closer looking it appears as if the presence of thought is known immediately but there is another thought that refers to the thought as a thought. So the recognition of the thought as a thought is itself a thought. After that, more thoughts trying to add meaning.

Can you see anything that is separate from the thought and does the thinking?

No. The thought simply appears and disappears. Appearance and disappearance seem to happen in the same space. I do not find something that produces thoughts. It all (even senses) seem to happen in the same space.

Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear?

I tried to make specific thoughts appear (about something specific). But a random thought appeared and another claimed to wanting that specifically. So, no I cannot find anything particular that makes them appear. They just appear.

Could you have done anything to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead?

No as per above. There is no choice

Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts?
Can you choose not to have painful, negative or fearful thoughts?
Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?

It is generally just one thought appearing not a selection. Some thoughts even feel a little intrusive, they certainly don’t ask for permission nor is there anything that could grant it. Some thoughts seem to appear as a reaction to another experience (like seeing or hearing). I tried to look for how a relation is formed but couldn't see it.

Is there anything that is responsible for the thoughts like a traffic cop saying which one to go and which one to stay? Can the flow of thoughts be changed?

Could not find anything that does. I tried to stop a flow and noticed something else entirely. It seem like there was a pre-verbal thought as a very vague idea, then some meaning was added to it (like seeing a face in a cloud) and only after that, the thought was verbalised with thoughts. I can stop the verbalisation but the original thought already happened. It is usually like a flash and labels come on top of it. I saw this for the first time.

Where do thoughts appear from? Where are they coming from and going to?

I already looked into this one but verified once more. There is particular region the appear from or dissipate to. It’s like right tin front of ‘me’ and gone again. I also cannot freeze a thought. This is easier to see with images as one can see how they loose form. When I try to hold them, another thought is created similar to the first but I can see that it is just a copy.

Do they appear randomly or in a structured way? Watch like a hawk.

Ok, so this is more tricky. There is a randomness to it. At the same time there is no total chaos in my mind. The thoughts usually revolve around something from my experience and therefore feel personal. As mentioned earlier, I tried to find when relationships between thoughts are formed but I could not exactly see it. It’s only a hunch for now.

Something else but perhaps related: There is a place I reach in meditation where I can see thoughts (basically images only) as a very, very fast stream. That one feels utterly random. It happens so fast, it’s hard to even glimpse. If I do, most of the things I see there are unknown to me but usually represent concrete things. These thoughts feel so alien, that it feels like they cannot be related to any memories or experiences.

Write down a sequence of 5 thoughts in the order that they appear. Now check:
Could you predict the order of their appearance?
Did you know which will be the second or the fourth?

Did you know which will be the second or the fourth?
Could not do it. Even the first one couldn’t be predicted, let alone the others. They do form a logical chain but the chaining does have a subtle feeling of being contrived. As mentioned, I was not yet able to see how patterns are created or relations formed.

Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle?

No, as mentioned earlier.

How long does that last? Test it for the fun of exploration.

It’s way too fast. As soon as I try to hold, it dissolves. The verbalisation sometimes stops in in’t tracks but these are afterthoughts. I did have situations during inquiry when thinking started to ‘stutter’. But that is different from stopping an actual thought or trying to hold one. It was the thinking itself that stopped for longer moments.

It seems that thought has some logical ordered appearance, but look carefully and just notice if there is an organised sequence. Or is it just another thought that says ‘these thoughts are in sequence’ or “they take content from previous thought”, or that "one thought follows another thought”?

I got stuck with this one. I want to come back to this one tomorrow and try to see how this works. Also, there is still a subtle feeling that the narrator has more authority than other thoughts. I wanted to look specifically into this one and see how that works.

Are thoughts 100% true?

:D. Hell no. There is a LOT of assuming. I was graced with many situations where my thoughts lead me to a certain belief just to be surprised a few days later.

What are you, when you don't think about what you are?

I don't know. All I can say I know is that I am here now, whatever I am with or without thinking...

All the best
Marc

[poppyseed]

Hi Marc
What you wrote is unmistakable:

The recognition of the thought as a thought is itself a thought.

The thought simply appears and disappears.

No, I cannot find anything that makes them appear.

There is still a subtle feeling that the narrator has more authority.

Perfect. When you say “narrator”… Does he speak? In what voice? Yours? Are you the one listening or the one narrating?
Have you actually ever heard your thoughts? Have you ever been able to record thoughts as they spontaneously arise and then play them back in order to hear them, and to hear that they are in the narrator's voice?
So do thoughts actually have a sound? Or is the ‘voice in the head’ simply thoughts about sound? Can thoughts be felt, smelled, tasted, heard or seen, or are they just known (as content)?
There is life happening— with and without the story, with and without the mental judge in the head. But since you are so absorbed in “the narration,” you miss what is right in front of your nose: there is no owner of the story. It simply is telling itself. There is no narrator at home. The thoughts are pretty much self-organised, matching to each other like puzzle pieces. The commentary is just like a radio, but there is no choice of channels.
The so called “narrator” tells the story in first person: How I did this and I did that, owning the deeds, presenting himself or herself as the creator, the master of body, the thinker of thoughts. I am the good guy or the bad guy, depending on the situation. But is the narration necessary for the play of life to happen?

Try this… write what you are experiencing right now using the words “I,” “me,” and “my.” Don’t write about past or future events, just a plain description of here and now. Like this:
I am lying in bed. I am hearing the traffic. I am typing these words.
I am feeling cold. I hear a dog barking.
Do this for a full ten minutes. Focus on what is happening around you— sounds, sensations, visual experiences— rather than the thinking process.
Then, for the next ten minutes, write without the words “I,” “me,” and “my.” Just describe the experience as it is happening using verbs alone. Like this:
Waiting for next thought, typing, breathing, blinking. Hearing the rain. Waiting for the next thought. Hearing birds singing.
Again, watch what is happening in the body. Don’t just rewrite what you wrote in the first part, rather focus on the here and now and describe what arises as it arises, keeping it always fresh.
Now compare the two ways of labelling the experience. Is one truer than the other? If so, which one? What is here without labels? Do labels affect the experience or just describe it?
Have a look. Does a description affect how you feel about what is described? Can you see that thoughts describe and create a story at the same time? Can you see that the word “I” is part of description and not as important as it seems?
Having done the exercise, can you see that “I” is a label and not an experiencer, not a narrator, not a thinker, not a doer not hearer of rain? “I” is not what makes the eyes blink, and it is not a breather; it’s a word used.

The sense of existing, of being here now.

Since it is universal to the label, it could mean, that Marc’s sense of I (am) is exactly the same as Rali’s sense of I (am)…

I don't know. All I can say I know is that I am here now, whatever I am with or without thinking...

'It seems like", "feels like", "sense of" = thought content
Nothing in DE is seems like..., it's either here (describable) or not through the senses. The rest is a story, an assumption, a faily tale.

Let’s say that you have lost your keys and you swear that you left them in your coat. You go to look and check all the pockets - the keys are not there. You swear they must be as that was the last place you remember them. You have a vivid memory of putting them there after you left the house. But when you check they are not there. At this point you can keep believing that the keys are in your pocket, or you can admit you were mistaken.

This is just like that. You may see clearly that the self is an illusion but still feel a sense of self - just like the keys. But feeling something to be true and seeing that it is or is not is different. This is why we may find ourselves coming back to your expectations at the start and at the end.
Now, I’d like to ask you to explore this SENSE of self very-very thoroughly. Not by thinking about it, but by FEELING it. Keep the focus of attention on the sense of self and inquire:

Does the sense of self have a location?
Does the sense of self have a shape or a size?
Does the sense of self say or communicate anything?
If the answer is yes, how does the sense do this exactly?
Does the sense of self have any characteristics or attributes?
What is the sense of self ‘made of’? An image? Sound? Taste? Smell? Sensation? Thought?
What is found? How exactly is it known that the sense of self is "here now", OR is it an assumption?
Furthermore...
What discerns it, distinguishes it, filters it out from "not me", etc.?
If and when that sense of "self" arises, what creates and/or notices it?
When there is a sense of "me", and thus "not me" as well, look for what "in here" looks out at what is "out there" (i.e., "not me")?
And having experienced a "me" your whole life: was it because you identified with an aspect of experience, or identified as an aspect of experience? Is/was there a difference between identifying with and identifying as something?
Lastly...
Focus on the feeling of am-ness/being, aliveness.
Can you tell if there is a being or just being?
Is life happening to a being or as being (verb)?
Is that “aliveness” any kind of object or subject? Is it even a human?
Is it what you've taken as "you" (am-ness)?

There are breathing, heartbeat, warmth – sensations; there are seeing, smelling, tasting, hearing, thinking. But where exactly is existence? Where is non-existence? Or are these just concepts?
Right now—this “existence”…
Where is it?
What shape is it?
What’s its edge?
Do you see a line/a border separating THIS (the seen, the heard, the smelled, the tasted, the felt, and the thought) and this am-ness? Or Am-ness is just another empty (universal) label for just THIS/whatever is happening?
And most importantly:
Is that “sense of being” you… or just another experience passing through?
Because if it’s a sense, it can fade.
If it can fade, it’s not you.
In DE can you find a self that is universal, that is here now?
In DE can you find a self that feels like everything/existence, OR just thoughts and sensations and "self that feels like existence" is a belief?
Now. What are you, without even the sense of being?
Don’t say. Don’t think.
Stay. Let all beliefs collapse. Report what remains when even “I exist” is seen as just another passing cloud.
Love
Rali

[seasidealive]

Hi Rali,

I have looked into most of the upper part of your instructions. For the lower ones, I may need a few days as I am back at work.

When you say “narrator”… Does he speak?

No. It is simply thoughts being verbalised. There is actually no narrator.

In what voice? Yours?

:)…There is no voice, only thinking. The voice I hear, when I actually speak is just sound (hearing).

Are you the one listening or the one narrating?

Neither, there is just thinking

Have you actually ever heard your thoughts?

Thoughts cannot be heard. There is a thought comparing verbalised thoughts with hearing and adding some qualities of hearing but it is known not to be hearing. Hearing is different, more real.

Have you ever been able to record thoughts as they spontaneously arise and then play them back in order to hear them, and to hear that they are in the narrator's voice?

No. I could already see, that it is impossible to hold these thoughts. Any recount of the same thought is only a copy.

So do thoughts actually have a sound? Or is the ‘voice in the head’ simply thoughts about sound?

There is no sound heard, it is additional thoughts that add some qualities of sound (or like you said, thoughts about sound).

Can thoughts be felt, smelled, tasted, heard or seen, or are they just known (as content)?

They are just known. It is always about taste or sound or seeing.

…there is no owner of the story.

I was looking again at thoughts being ordered or random. I can clearly see, that ‘I’ am not in control of thoughts and that they just appear and disappear. Looking further, I realised that there was a belief saying ‘well, something must be in control’ and I thought about breathing and heartbeat. What if there is actually not one in control. There just is a system that is working the way it does. Is it the same with thinking?

But is the narration necessary for the play of life to happen?

No, it is commentary. I know this, have seen it. Still I sometimes catch myself in self-talk and even agreeing with thoughts. But agreeing is itself a thought.

Having done the exercise, can you see that “I” is a label and not an experiencer, not a narrator, not a thinker, not a doer not hearer of rain?

Yes, it was just one more word added. The experience was not different in any way. Nothing different in the body either.

I will report on the others asap.

Thank you so much!

Best
Marc

[poppyseed]

Hi Marc
Is everything OK? Do you need help or further clarification?

Love
Rali

[seasidealive]

Hi Rali,

yes, thanks for asking and you patience. You gave me a lot of pointers and I wanted to look carefully. I did inquire daily but needed some time for this. I actually went back and forth a little as in some cases I could not see clearly.

What I found

Can you see that thoughts describe and create a story at the same time?

Yes, clearly. The tendency to believe is still there though. It takes focus most of the time to see this.

Does the sense of self have a location?
Does the sense of self have a shape or a size?
Does the sense of self say or communicate anything?

No location, shape, size or communication found. As soon as I try to really focus on it, it dissipates.

Does the sense of self have any characteristics or attributes?
What is the sense of self ‘made of’? An image? Sound? Taste? Smell? Sensation? Thought?
What is found? How exactly is it known that the sense of self is "here now", OR is it an assumption?

It is clear now that it was a belief I picked up along the way. I cannot find a here, nor a now. I cannot find a border between now and the previous or next moment. I cannot find a border between here or there. Beliefs like ‘location’ and ‘time(line)’, are created. Again, this mental operation is so conditioned that it takes a lot of focus to see.

What discerns it, distinguishes it, filters it out from "not me", etc.?
If and when that sense of "self" arises, what creates and/or notices it?
When there is a sense of "me", and thus "not me" as well, look for what "in here" looks out at what is "out there" (i.e., "not me”)?

Looking more closely, I can see how the thinking just tries to grasp at everything, latching onto whatever presents itself, labels it then deduces ‘this is that hence it is not me’, and thereby creating self all the time from nothing. I do not find an inside nor an outside when I look closely.

And having experienced a "me" your whole life: was it because you identified with an aspect of experience, or identified as an aspect of experience? Is/was there a difference between identifying with and identifying as something?

During life, I identified as many things (personalities, traits, attributes) coming and going and with some experiences (things that happened). Identification has always been a process (creation of stories) as I can see even clearer now. As I am writing this, the only identification I sense (despite not wanting to), is trying to see no self with your help…

Lastly...
Focus on the feeling of am-ness/being, aliveness.
Can you tell if there is a being or just being?
Is life happening to a being or as being (verb)?
Is that “aliveness” any kind of object or subject? Is it even a human?
Is it what you've taken as "you" (am-ness)?

There is a thought that says there must be an experiencer. But when I look for the experiencer, I find only senses and thinking. I do not know what it is like to not be human. So there is an assumption that it’s human. But yes, this is what I interpreted as here, now.

Right now—this “existence”…
Where is it?
What shape is it?
What’s its edge?
Do you see a line/a border separating THIS (the seen, the heard, the smelled, the tasted, the felt, and the thought) and this am-ness? Or Am-ness is just another empty (universal) label for just THIS/whatever is happening?

I do not find any shape or edges. All I find is this blend of senses and thinking upon inspection. So for all I know, ‘am-ness’ is another label.

Is that “sense of being” you… or just another experience passing through?

I don’t know…I can’t see this clearly. It feels like something is happening (seeing, hearing etc.) and from these experiences, thinking creates a coherent story out of it. But even if I set thinking aside, the sensing always stays. I do not know what it is like to not experience senses or thinking. Thinking can go quiet for short time but never really stop.

In DE can you find a self that is universal, that is here now?
In DE can you find a self that feels like everything/existence, OR just thoughts and sensations and "self that feels like existence" is a belief?

I find thoughts about a self that feels like existence or existing. In DE I always find senses and thinking only.

Now. What are you, without even the sense of being?

With the understanding that I am not the thinker, experiencer or doer, I tried hard, asking what remains. The mind goes into overdrive and feelings in the ‘body’ arise that feel like pulling. I notice thoughts as concepts and beliefs. In the end, it’s always just senses and thinking.

Rali, I do sense doubt that I am doing this right. I can look but somehow, the findings don't sink in. Like you mentioned in the example with the keys, I can't shake the thought that seeing what is and accepting what is are different pairs of shoes.

Anyway, thanks always for your support.

Best
Marc

[poppyseed]

Hi Marc

There is some very clear seeing here. You’ve seen through the narrator, the thinker, the doer, the self as container, the self as existence. You’ve broken every concept, caught belief manufacturing identity live—and still…

It feels like something is happening…

I can't shake the thought…

I do sense doubt that I am doing this right. I can look but somehow, the findings don't sink in.

First things first:
"feels like", "seems like", "sense of" = thought content
Nothing in DE is feels/seems like, it's either here clear as a day, or not.
But you’re right. Seeing and accepting are not the same. But have a look:
Is there an “I” in control of thoughts, the narration? Or is it just thoughts self-organising and sticking the “me” label on top after the fact?
Is there an “I” that has seen and had a realisation and now is getting stuck again, worried that it is not sinking in??
The “self” is nothing but thought claiming ownership of self-organising processes that were already happening. You’ve seen again and again. Every illusion you’ve hunted has collapsed under direct looking. But something is still waiting to feel like it’s true.
Something is holding back - an expectation - waiting for a final click, an emotional seal of approval, a special state. That’s the last identity: the one waiting for liberation.
Now hear this—and let it detonate:
There is no shift. No transformation. No breakthrough.
There’s just this: Senses and thinking.
That’s it. Always was. No you. No center. No narrator. No one doing anything.
Even the doubt is just another thought about a you, trying to reform. Is that doubt even yours? Is the expectation yours?
So now I ask you:
What is missing—right now—that would make this “complete”?
Not in theory. Not eventually. Now.
Let the thought try to answer. Watch it.
And then ask:
Who is that thought talking to?
For any "mind answer" that comes, no matter how correct and convincing it seems, don't stop with a mind answer. What is convinced? What is doubting?
Keep looking/inquiring until it's settled beyond any possible doubt.

Conditioning was not formed in a day and it will not change in a day either. It may take years. The initial realization, though, is irreversible, just as we can never go back to believing in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy. That’s actually quite normal. Seeing is never 24/7. There's likely to be a "honeymoon period," and then what we call, "got it, lost it," as untrue beliefs come up to be questioned (doubt). This can go on for months and years.

It may seem like the self keeps reasserting itself, but this is simply out of habit. That's the default. Every time we get triggered, even just the slightest, the sense of self “jumps” back since there is an emotional charge, and that makes it feel real. Seeing that there is no separate self is NOT the end. Actually, it's just the beginning, the first step. Lost of further inquiry and emotional work is needed to fully live it, to untangle sensations from stories. There is a big difference between seeing that there is no self, and the full dissolution of the sense of self. To get there, it can take years, but it's different for everyone.
To “deal” with this, question everything, and little by little you will notice changes in everyday life: less judgment, more openness; less thinking, more appreciation; less story, more being; less structure, more flow. You will notice that some habitual thoughts no longer arise. The story changes in a way that allows more space for simply being.
There might still be expectations, confusion, and doubtful thoughts. That’s quite normal at this stage. You may be swaying between “I get it” and “I don’t get it.” You may be thinking that this is not enough, that some experiences need to happen, that you should be happy and blissful all the time. When these thoughts arise, bring the focus to what is present here now. Just THIS. And look again: what is here that wants THIS to be different (including the presence of doubtful thoughts)?
Here a video that might be helpful:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJQcD588g2w
Here is an article that you might find "informative":
https://vinceschubert.substack.com/p/wh ... KvAzMYmYlw
Love
Rali

[seasidealive]

Hi Rali,

Thank you so much for sharing all this wisdom and being strict with me :).

Is that doubt even yours? Is the expectation yours?

There still was an expectation of a shift, yes. And no, it was not 'mine', it was created based on what others described of course. The doubt is just a followup thought coming from the comparison between was is and the expectation and/or not even really knowing what to expect.

Keep looking/inquiring until it's settled beyond any possible doubt.

I did inquire as much as I could fit into my day. There is a lot thinking, energetic sensations and some emotions too. It definitely still needs more effort to absolutely settle.
From a more practical point, will you still be working with me until there is no doubt left of no self or should I do this on my own?

The references also help for orientation, thank you.

All the best
Marc

[poppyseed]

Hi Marc

From a more practical point, will you still be working with me until there is no doubt left of no self or should I do this on my own?

This conversation doesn’t need to end – it will go for as long as it is needed even after no self is seen clearly. The recognition of no self is just the beginning of seeing life and “yourself” in a new light. It takes time to clean up all the "mess", to settle in and adjust.
BUT…
I won’t be working with you anymore.
Because there’s no one here to work with. There never was.
You’ve seen it. You’ve said it yourself:

There’s just thinking and sensation.
There’s no narrator.
There’s no doer, no controller, no experiencer.
Even the expectation isn’t mine.
Only senses and thinking remain.

So who the hell is left to wait for certainty?
Who is asking for more guidance?
There is no one.
Let that hit where it hurts. Let the identity collapse—not just the conceptual ones, but even the spiritual one:
“The one doing inquiry.”
“The one waiting for no-self to settle.”
“The one who needs to know it’s done.”
These are just self-organising thought patterns trying to fill a vacuum.

Check:
What is it? What is it that is currently identified with thoughts?
What is it that is standing apart from thought and has the ability to disregard them or believe them?
What do (doubtful) thoughts happen to?
Is there someone outside of thoughts, being identified with them?
Where is the mysterious, unknown, outside entity (the doubter, the one not having a shift))?

Just notice what is ‘underneath’ all thoughts (even the insights).
Thoughts add an overlaying narrative of names, labels, interpretations, explanations over the simplicity of what is.
Instead of endlessly reaching for ideas, concepts and explanations, just let it all go, and see.
Just see what is here now silently, without words. Just notice what is left when you stop thinking about it.

Now, Marc—
Don’t touch a single thought. Don’t reach for meaning. Don’t try to land anywhere.
Instead, right now—report directly:
Is there a separate entity—‘self,’ ‘me,’ ‘I’—anywhere, in any way, shape, or form? Was there ever?
Don’t think. Don’t explain. Don't argue. Don't assess.
LOOK!!
Then tell me what’s undeniably true, now—without a guide, without a self, without a shift.
Love
Rali

[seasidealive]

Hi Rali,

“The one doing inquiry.”
“The one waiting for no-self to settle.”
“The one who needs to know it’s done.”
These are just self-organising thought patterns trying to fill a vacuum.

Checking back and looking, there is still some thought identification lingering. So it’s verified again: thoughts don’t ask for or are granted permission to arise, no choice, no control. It only seems ‘relevant’ and ‘personal’ because thoughts aggregate ‘around’ an idea or belief that also just arises, then more labels come on top. So relevance and personal is also just labelling just as the ‘I’ or ‘me’ or ‘meaning’…

Questions come up provoking more thoughts about defiance, defence (even as images), everything is being questioned, the questioning is being questioned, the questioner is being questioned. An idea of wanting to stay in control, so control is being investigated.

What can ‘I’ control? Not the environment, not the body, not what is seen or heard or any other senses. Intention is a thought or idea, decisions are thoughts, none can be controlled…

There really is no one controlling! Then there is laughing, lots of laughing…why want or hope for what is not here? Why seek?

Is there a separate entity—‘self,’ ‘me,’ ‘I’—anywhere, in any way, shape, or form? Was there ever?

No, that's just stories, labels and mind machinations

Best
Marc

[poppyseed]

Hi Marc
You’ve seen through every layer. Not conceptually. Directly.

Intention is a thought or idea, decisions are thoughts, none can be controlled…

Yes!! Decision making and control are not just impossible because there is no "I" to executte them. They are an illusion on every level.
“Decision making” is just a commentary over the seeming change of one event leading to another, leading to another, with “actions” based on previous conditioning. The thought “decision is made” is layered on top of other thoughts / beliefs / descriptions of what has happened before.
Why does the wind blow? It just blows. Yes we can say it happens as a result of previous events but there’s no entity “wind” that does the blowing. There is no wind that decides to blow. It’s just language.
What is “moving of the hands” in DE? We’ve seen that it’s just a sensation, labelled “hands moving” + colour/shape labelled “hands moving”. So, what makes the sensations to appear? What makes seeing to appear? LOOK! Is there anything that causes anything to appear? Do cause and effect exist outside of thought content?
Thought comes to describe that things are happening and why they are happening, but in DE things are just happening. Is the description/explanation/label needed for things to happen?
Is there even change?

There really is no one controlling! Then there is laughing, lots of laughing…
That’s the release.

Yes!! Not bliss. Not transcendence. Not light. Just the crack of the illusion giving way—utterly, finally.

So let's review where we are at with the following questions.
What has changed and what hasn’t in normal everyday living. What changes? What stays the same?
What is the biggest difference from before starting this conversation?
Is seeking still going on?
Is there any confusion at all or anything you would like to address? We can look at time, memories, space…
Can you say with a big fat YES, it is clear what the illusion of a separate self is?

Love
Rali

[seasidealive]

Hi Rali,

Thank you so much for all the pointing, much gratitude!

What has changed and what hasn’t in normal everyday living. What changes? What stays the same? What is the biggest difference from before starting this conversation?

Before:
Changes that affect daily life already manifested (if one can say that) in different ways. Shortly after the start of the spiritual seeking, shadow stuff came up just like that. Lots of traumas from childhood. Some of that was apparently already integrated. Judgement dropped in a big way (suddenly people around me appeared so much prettier and there was more kindness and happiness all around). Family grudges lifted; wounds healed. Worldly ambitions also dropped as well as some hobbies without any thoughts of ‘loss’.
After:
Along the investigation, some layer of resistance dropped quickly (not sure about what, it just dropped). The biggest change is that there is an entire layer of thought(patterns) that just stopped. The mind chatter, that always needed to comment, explain, emphasize, discuss with itself is just GONE. It tries to come back and just ‘bounces off’…The mind got so much quieter, not silent but quieter. In its place something opened, some space to allow what is, and there is more presence.
Some labels don’t stick anymore. Every time a thought comes that says ‘I…this or that’ there is a pause and just not believed in. ‘Meaning’ labels are less sticky (e.g. ‘this is because…’ or ‘should be like that...’) and fall off quickly.
At work, a lot of uncertainty is currently unraveling but there are no fearful thoughts, no sleepless nights…
In the sense perceptions, the ‘object’ labelling still happens quite quickly (e.g. seeing ‘people’, ‘cars’, ‘trees’ etc.). Not much has changed here.
There are other (thought-)patterns that persist, and are now clearer than before. I.e. simulating/rehearsing conversations in the mind. Like you mentioned, patterns were not formed in a day and may not vanish in a day either. Something more to explore…
Finally, there is nothing wrong with anything that has not changed.

Is seeking still going on?

There is no drive to be ‘enlightened’ or ‘awakened’ as an achievement or goal anymore. No thoughts, that say ‘if only I get there…’ or ‘when/how will it happen’, no expectations. More freedom instead, but also openness to explore deeper, not to gain anything, get somewhere or get away from something. Just for the love of embracing and experiencing it.

Is there any confusion at all or anything you would like to address? We can look at time, memories, space…

Lots of questions remain. We have covered ground on what ‘I’ is not. It’s still unclear what THIS actually is. Of course, some other concepts like time, space, causality (like you mentioned above) can surely be explored more deeply to see more clearly. Some of this is still rather subtle.

Can you say with a big fat YES, it is clear what the illusion of a separate self is?

It is clear, that the mind creates the separate self, it’s clear how it threads meaning and identities into stories, overlaying and veiling what is, that experience is unfolding without the ‘me’ and that there is no ‘I’ running the show. There is no attachment to the past (stories) found. There is no doubt, there is no separate 'me' here.

In any case (wherever ‘we are’ with this), your guidance has been already extremely helpful. Again, thank you so much!
All the best
Marc

[poppyseed]

Hi Marc

There is a lot of clear seeing here. Not because something happened, but because the need for something to happen has died. There’s no final state. No last answer. No ultimate experience.
Just this. Ordinary, raw, unowned.

Lots of questions remain. We have covered ground on what ‘I’ is not. It’s still unclear what THIS actually is.

That question—“What is THIS actually?”—is the mind's last trick.
It’s not seeking truth. It’s seeking ground. It’s the mind saying: “Okay, I can accept there’s no self… But at least give me something to know. Give me something to land on. Give me something to call real.”
But this isn't that kind of game. So look—right now:
What is THIS?
Don’t answer. Just stop. Drop every label. Drop every meaning. Not conceptually. Viscerally. Don’t try to see what it is. Just see what’s here—before the question.
Sound. Colour. Sensation. Thoughts arising and dissolving. That’s all. That’s what THIS is.
No need to wrap it up. Let it stay open. Let it remain a mystery. Because it cannot be known. Whatever story you think of this, it will not be it. THIS is “experienceable” but unknowable.
Not knowing is the end of seeking.

Of course, some other concepts like time, space, causality (like you mentioned above) can surely be explored more deeply to see more clearly. Some of this is still rather subtle.

Yes—questions may still arise. Patterns still echo. But now they don’t land. They don’t define. They’re seen. That’s all that ever needed to happen. So now...There’s no need to hold anything up. No need to claim awakening. No need to protect it.
Just live.
And if contraction appears—beautiful. If mind chatter returns—welcome it. If identity reforms—see it as it arises.
But never again pretend there’s a “you” who needs saving.
There never was.

In any case (wherever ‘we are’ with this), your guidance has been already extremely helpful. Again, thank you so much!

It is really my pleasure to work with you! There is no rush! It doesn’t have to stop even after the no self is seen. We can continue to work with whatever still presents as a “challenge”. I'll be here even after the "gate is crossed".

Here are some pointers on time and memories…
There is a general assumption that there is linear time that started (if started at all) somewhere very far in the past and advances to the distant future. The present moment (now) is considered to be a very small fragment of time, or an event that is moving forward on a linear line, coming from the past and advancing to the future.

But is there an experience of the ’now’ moving along the line of time?
Any experience of one ‘moment’ giving way to the next?
Is there any actual or direct experience of one event following another?
How fast is the ‘present moment’ actually moving?
Just look at 'this moment', can you find a point where it began?
How long does the ‘now’ last?
Where does the ‘now’ start, and where does it end?
When does the ‘now’ exactly become the 'past'?
What is the ‘past’ in actual experience?
So is there actual experience of ‘time’ or thoughts about ‘time’?

Also almost everybody believes that a memory thought is referring to something that has happened. That a memory thought is a different thought than a non-memory thought.
Look at what is actually going on and not what thoughts say - but what actually is.

What is memory exactly?
What is the memory ‘made of’?
WHEN does the memory appear?
What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘memory’ thought?
How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened?

Then, look at a thought about the future.
What is the future thought ‘made of’?
WHEN does the future thought appear?
What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘future’ thought?
How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘future’ thought refers to something that will happen?

Then let’s compare a thought about past and a thought about the future.
What is the EXACT difference between the thoughts about past and future?
If there is difference and how is that difference is known exactly?
Love
Rali

[seasidealive]

Hi Rali,

So many beautiful questions…:)

That question—“What is THIS actually?”—is the mind's last trick.

Oh yeah, that’s a tricky one. But strangely, it’s ok. Let it be a mystery then…

What is “moving of the hands” in DE? We’ve seen that it’s just a sensation, labelled “hands moving” + colour/shape labelled “hands moving”. So, what makes the sensations to appear? What makes seeing to appear? LOOK! Is there anything that causes anything to appear? Do cause and effect exist outside of thought content?

The mind was chewing on this a bit. While walking home tonight, watching the legs move and they just moved as if they knew the way. Just kept moving in my visual field without a walker or operator. Then some frantic laughing again :D. (Other people might think this guy is on drugs…)

Nothing is moving them, it just is.

Cause and effect is just labelling after the fact. First this ‘happened’ then that ‘happened’. Ergo there is a sequence, and one has affected the other. But that is just thoughts. There is no ‘because’, it just is…

Experience of time is an odd one. Thoughts of the past (memories) and thoughts of the future have the same exact quality of thinking. There are just additional labels that say ‘this happened’ and ‘that may happen’. But the now is experienced as a continuous moment. But even ‘moment’ is a concept that requires before and after. Just can’t find a transition from one moment to the next. There is always just this.

Even the sequentiality of events come into question. The order of events is also just in thought. From DE there is no actual knowing whether ‘things happen’ in forward or reverse.

All the best
Marc

[poppyseed]

Hi Marc
You’ve stepped into the final fire. No floor. No sky. No one left to hold onto time or cause.
Just this—unspeakable, unlocatable, ungraspable.
Experience without experiencer. Time without passage. Nothing makes anything happen.
It just is.
So now… Don’t wait for some arrival. You are already standing where nothing stands.
Burn in it. Laugh in it. Let the mystery take you.
You’re free.

We have some checkpoint questions. Would you like to answer these?

Love
Rali