I'm ready

[danny7]

or so I believe.LOL

[Damon Kamda]

Cool.

So, let's get the cards on the table, danny.

What do you know is true? Do you exist?

[danny7]

I can understand why I don't exist on an intellectual(?) level.
I'm here to cross the gate and see it.
I'm willing to do whatever it takes to experience it.
I feel there's no me as identity but I also feel I'm a center of which everything emanates.

[Damon Kamda]

Ok, nice and clear. Thanks.

So what if I told you that there is no you at all- nothing and no one behind experience, just always only the experience?

No you out of which everything emanates. You have only ever been an idea, a notion, emanated out of nowhere.

If you let this in anc see if it is real, what comes up (thoughts, feelings, sensations)?

[danny7]

I would then ask what is witnessing.
What is processing the thought that comes and goes to the nowhere.
What is or has been conditioned to believe that falsity.
This is what I perceive as the center.

[Damon Kamda]

That is the question indeed- and it's up to you to find out.

What makes that perceived center you, a self?

[Damon Kamda]

Just send you a pm, please read it.
Thanks, we'll continue this later.

[danny7]

Thanks for the Pm-I read it but I'll go ahead and try and answer your question towards me anyway.
The perceived center is thought based.I've included emotions as well as I also perceive them to originate in thought.
I don't think it makes a "me"or "self".
Through previous reading about the false I,I somehow managed to put mine "eyes"behind me.
Literally.
So I see my body as a vehicle and my arms similar to how I would see the hood of a car.
As I drive.
But I feel my body moves out of something else's volition and not a "me".
Same with thought,comes from nowhere and vanishes into the nothing.
Where I would suppose that I'm stuck then,is with the idea/feeling/sensing of a center.
This would be the stumbling block towards no-self realization.
Being that thought comes and goes,but I sense it being paused where I am...processed or rejected and then it leaves.
So I'm not seeing the ghost,there seems to be something palpable there.
Hope you caught on to where I am at the moment.

[Damon Kamda]

Miraculously found some time...

Hope you caught on to where I am at the moment.

Not entirely, but we'll get there. What's much more interesting though is the question if you did? Is there an I at this moment? Is there?

You say you perceive a stumbling block in "realizing no-self , namely the palpable idea/feeling/sensing of a center. A center that is constituted by thoughts and emotions.

Yet, you also say you don't think that center constitutes a "you" or " self"?

So, let's dive into this.

What would you expect the "no-self realization" to be like? What do you expect out of it?

In what way is the perception of a center a stumbling block?

Through previous reading about the false I,I somehow managed to put mine "eyes"behind me.
Literally.

Tell me more. Is there a false I and a real I? Explain what happened and what the difference is.

I would then ask what is witnessing.
What is processing the thought that comes and goes to the nowhere.
What is or has been conditioned to believe that falsity.

Correct me if I'm wrong. It seems you have seen through the insubstantial nature of the narrative self- the idea of being a person, a character, and now you're experiencing a sense of being the observer, the witness of it all. Correct?

That's the last hurdle.
Now it's time to take an honest and direct look at this perceived center.
Is it real? Or is it, as you imply, made up of thought and emotion? A subtler version of the story?

Is there anyone at the center of experience- witnessing, processing, believing? Anyone at all? Look, danny.

[danny7]

1)I don't have any expectations for the no-self experience
2)the way that the center is a stumbling block is because If I understand the concept of no self correctly...I'm "supposed" to experience the oneness of everything and not a "me"as a center which is where I'm at.
3)There is no I.However,I experience a non-conceptual center,a nucleus of the nothing that receives and sends
4)I have seen through the narrative self,the character.There is no person there.Or here.
So there's still a there and a here.
It has thought and emotion but is not composed of anything.
I have not been able to touch my body since I found out it wasn't true.
Somehow the sense of it and another body feel the same.
There also seems to be a third eye somewhere.
Something that is looking at all of this from beyond.
When this happens all senses change.
Distance,sounds,colors and everything else seem to merge and they have an inexplicable quality.
This only lasts a couple of seconds in my experience.

[Damon Kamda]

1)I don't have any expectations for the no-self experience

Yes, you do. See your next sentence.

2)the way that the center is a stumbling block is because If I understand the concept of no self correctly...I'm "supposed" to experience the oneness of everything and not a "me"as a center which is where I'm at.

In what way is the perception of a center to experience incongruous with "the oneness of everything"? Who would experience the oneness of everything? Is that even possible? If it is in fact the case that everything is one, as in one continuous, unbroken reality (which it is)- how can there be someone to experience it, ever?

3)There is no I.However,I experience a non-conceptual center,a nucleus of the nothing that receives and sends

Are you sure it is non-conceptual? Have you checked, in reality, if there is an actual center there? Is there something that receives and sends? Or is this center an assumption? What is the nature of this center? Look deeply- in experience. Is there an actual center- a central processing unit- a control room- to experience? Or is this an illusion?

4)I have seen through the narrative self,the character.There is no person there.Or here.
So there's still a there and a here.
It has thought and emotion but is not composed of anything.
I have not been able to touch my body since I found out it wasn't true.
Somehow the sense of it and another body feel the same.
There also seems to be a third eye somewhere.
Something that is looking at all of this from beyond.
When this happens all senses change.
Distance,sounds,colors and everything else seem to merge and they have an inexplicable quality.
This only lasts a couple of seconds in my experience.

Where does here end and there begin?

Who or what has thought and emotion? Is there an entity that owns these?

All these special experiences- concepts of a third eye, the notion of looking from a distance at everything, the inexplicable quality of perceptions- do they happen TO someone. Is someone creating these?

[danny7]

If it is in fact the case that everything is one, as in one continuous, unbroken reality (which it is)- how can there be someone to experience it, ever?

Sorry but me no comprehend this at all.

Are you sure it is non-conceptual? Have you checked, in reality, if there is an actual center there?

Yes it is non-conceptual.
It is no comprised of thought.It is just there.
It may be impersonal but it is.

Is there an actual center- a central processing unit- a control room- to experience? Or is this an illusion?

I never spoke of a processing unit.
Instead,a center where thoughts pause.
Thoughts are fleeting and seem to be butterflies.

All these special experiences- concepts of a third eye, the notion of looking from a distance at everything, the inexplicable quality of perceptions- do they happen TO someone. Is someone creating these?

I never said they were special.
The don't happen to me because there is no me.
Much less one defined(limited)by societal structures.
But there was a witness of these things.
This is what I call a center.
Maybe some others call it the I am.
I know who I am not.What I am is totally beyond me.

[Damon Kamda]

If it is in fact the case that everything is one, as in one continuous, unbroken reality (which it is)- how can there be someone to experience it, ever?

Sorry but me no comprehend this at all.

My bad- too conceptual. My point is- if everything is one (which it is) how can there be someone to observe this?

Yes it is non-conceptual.
It is no comprised of thought.It is just there.
It may be impersonal but it is.

I never spoke of a processing unit.
Instead,a center where thoughts pause.
Thoughts are fleeting and seem to be butterflies.

I never said they were special.
The don't happen to me because there is no me.
Much less one defined(limited)by societal structures.
But there was a witness of these things.
This is what I call a center.
Maybe some others call it the I am.
I know who I am not.What I am is totally beyond me.

So the center to experience you keep referring to is a non-conceptual, impersonal witness?

Yet in one paragraph you say "there is no me" as well as" what I am is totally beyond me". That's not very clear.

What is the I which identity eludes you?
Does it exist, or is it an assumption?
Could it be nothing more than a figure of speech?
Could even that witness, that center be an idea, a thought, emerging like a butterfly, then vanishing again?

[danny7]

if everything is one (which it is) how can there be someone to observe this?

Herein may be the problem.
The everything is one concept which I've read about but have never grasped.
Not even intellectually.
Maybe poetically and philosophically but no more.

So the center to experience you keep referring to is a non-conceptual, impersonal witness?

Yet in one paragraph you say "there is no me" as well as" what I am is totally beyond me". That's not very clear........Does it exist, or is it an assumption?

Yes an impersonal witness.
And a total assumption on my part.
Non-conceptual because I don't subscribe to it or think about it unless asked.
Just a feeling that I am the nucleus of everything around me.
And If I can feel it there must be a something there,just not an identity.
This is what I meant.

[Damon Kamda]

Herein may be the problem.
The everything is one concept which I've read about but have never grasped.
Not even intellectually.
Maybe poetically and philosophically but no more.

Maybe we should let this one rest for a moment. We generally don't use this as a pointer here, I was trying to see if this angle might work for you. We'll get there later, perhaps.

Yes an impersonal witness.
And a total assumption on my part.
Non-conceptual because I don't subscribe to it or think about it unless asked.
Just a feeling that I am the nucleus of everything around me.
And If I can feel it there must be a something there,just not an identity.
This is what I meant.

Reminds me of a line from a Radiohead song: "Just because you feel it, doesn't mean it's there".
There's a feeling that you are the nucleus, the center. That feeling is exactly what we should be examining, and more importantly the process by which that nucleus becomes you.

It now becomes a matter of looking closely at how this mechanism operates, to check what is real and what isn't.
The feeling of a nucleus to experience is there, obviously.
Now how does the nucleus become you?

What does the word, the notion "you" actually refer to in this process?
Does it have a referent in reality?