Die before you die

This is a read-only part of the forum. All threads where seeing happens are stored here and come from this forum, the Facebook guiding area and various LU blogs. The complete list, sorted by guide, contains all links. The archives include threads of those that came to LU already seeing as well.
User avatar
Rachszk
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2019 8:18 am

Re: Die before you die

Postby Rachszk » Tue May 07, 2019 9:18 pm

Hi Vivian,

sorry I typed this when I was a little tired and realised one of the sentences didn't make sense so I've retyped it:

*There isn't actually an experience of wanting. My mind says 'i want' usually this is something I believe will make me happy, happier or help solve/get rid of uncomfortable sensations.

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 4678
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Die before you die

Postby Vivien » Wed May 08, 2019 2:08 am

Hi Rachel,

Nice looking!
There isn't actually an experience of wanting. My mind says 'i want' usually this is something I would've will make me happy, happier or help solve uncomfortable sensations.
You often write: “my mind says…” – so I want to make sure what you mean exactly by this. Is this just a language thing?
And what is it that has a mind?
What is the AE of mind?

If I feel bored there is a tightness in the chest area, and possibly some uncomfortable feeling around my head area. But it's not easy to be 100% sure as's not an easy feeling to invoke. But generally it's an uncomfortable feeling, followed by the thoughts 'this is so boring' or 'im bored'.
All right. The sensations labelled ‘boredom’ is NOT the AE of ‘boredom’, but the AE of sensations.
The label ‘boredom’ is also not the AE of ‘boredom’, since the label is the AE of thought.
There is NO AE of ‘boredom’. It’s just a concept an idea. So there might be thoughts ABOUT ‘boredom’, but this doesn’t correspond to what is really going on. Is this totally clear?

Let’s experiment with some other concepts. Spend enough time with each concept, until it’s totally clear what is really happening. Don’t rush.

Have a thought of something that you don’t like. It could be anything (rainy weather, getting old, the barking of the neighbour’s dog). Shift the focus of attention to the “not liking”.
How ‘not liking’ is actually experienced?

Now have another thought of liking something. Pay attention to the ‘liking’ itself.
What is the AE of ‘liking’?

Now, imagine something that irritates you.
How is that thing/object/event actually doing the irritation? It seems that that thing/object/event is doing it to you. How exactly?
What is the AE of ‘irritation’?


Think of something that frustrates you.
How is that thing/object/event actually doing (the frustration) to you?
How ‘frustration’ is actually felt?


Now, think of something that you find calming, peaceful or relaxing.
How is thing/object/even actually making you calm or peaceful? What does the object itself doing to you?
What is the AE of something being peaceful or relaxing?


Is there anything about emotions that we haven’t covered and you would like to look at?


The reason why we do these exercises is to see how much of our experience is distorted by thoughts, concepts and mental images. So the purpose of these exercises to notice that there is a conceptual overlay, which is not the actual reality itself. They distort and colour or perception. And from there, we cannot see what is really actually happening, since we see everything through this conceptual overlay. So we look at the overlay and don’t even notice the actual experience ‘behind’ it. Thus we mistake the overlay with ‘reality’, with what is really going on. Can you see this?

But the aim of these exercise is not to stop these overlays from appearing, but rather to see them for what they really are. The overlay of in itself is not problematic, as long as we see that it’s just an overlay.

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
Rachszk
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2019 8:18 am

Re: Die before you die

Postby Rachszk » Wed May 08, 2019 9:11 pm

Hi Vivian, I have made a start on the questions, I will finish them tomorrow and I would like to go back over the last question I have answered as in think I need to spend a bit more time with this question, thanks Rachel
.And what is it that has a mind?
What is the AE of mind?
Sorry I say mind when I mean thoughts. There is no experience of mind. I don't even know if there is a mind or if everything just comes from the brain?. I don't know the science behind thought. Its it's more a concept and invisible unknowable place where thought, imagery excetera hhappen. Ill use the word thought from now on.

. There is NO AE of ‘boredom’. It’s just a concept an idea. So there might be thoughts ABOUT ‘boredom’, but this doesn’t correspond to what is really going on. Is this totally clear?
I can see that sensations happen and thoughts happen that label the sensation. But ultimately it is just a sensation followed by a thought. The word boredom just describes an uncomfortable feeling.
. How ‘not liking’ is actually experienced?
Tightness in the chest and head area, then thought says 'wish that dog would shut up barking!'. 'Not liking' is not experienced. Just a sensation that thought labels 'i don't like'.
.What is the AE of ‘liking’?
Liking, generally there is first a thought or maybe a seeing of something I like, there is a relaxed feeling in the chest are, my face smiles and thoughts say 'i like'. It's the same as feeling happy. Although I can see that actually there is no feeling happy, just a more intense sensation but very similar. The mind labels it happy. But I cannot actually see or experience something called 'happy'.

.How is that thing/object/event actually doing the irritation? It seems that that thing/object/event is doing it to you. How exactly?
What is the AE of ‘irritation
If I go back to the neighbours dog barking because this does irritate me sometimes. Again the sensation is similar if not the same to 'not liking' tension in the chest and head area, perhaps mild tension in the stomach, I crease up forehead, clench my jaw. Thoughts arise ''i wish the noise would stop" or thoughts about my inconsiderate neighbours, ultimately the desire arises for the dog to stop barking. But again this just a thought, actual 'desiring' is not experienced. But I know if the dog stops barking the tension will drain away. How does the dog barking cause irritation, I think it's uncomfortable on my ears/hearing. It causes physical discomfort so the bodyy tenses.
. How is that thing/object/event actually doing (the frustration) to you?
How ‘frustration’ is actually felt?
Frustration, if I feel frustrated, like if my phone isn't working properly, I would say the thoughts cause the feeling or the sensation of frustration. The thought that I really need to to make a phone call but I can't get a signal on this stupid phone, then thoughts might escalate into some terrible story of what might happen if I can't make this call right now. So I would say thoughts cause the uncomfortable feeling unless it's actual physical pain. Then physical pain will also cause tension.

[

User avatar
Rachszk
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2019 8:18 am

Re: Die before you die

Postby Rachszk » Wed May 08, 2019 10:34 pm

. . How is that thing/object/event actually doing (the frustration) to you?
How ‘frustration’ is actually felt?
Ok I've sat with this a little bit again this evening. And my earlier answer is wrong. I was thinking of different scenarios that might cause different emotions, like seeing a cute baby (happiness) or my dog not returning when I call her (frustration/anger) and noticed that the sensation seems to appear at the same time that the incident is happening. There is no thought. Thought arises after the sensation has arisen and labels it and starts to create a story. Depending which way the story goes then it might ease the sensation or exacerbate it (I think it does, but I'm going to check that out as well). So with frustration if my phone can't get a signal there is the sensation, which is a mild tension to start with again in the chest and head, then thoughts arise and say 'arr my phone's not working' etc... , perhaps at the time it doesn't matter, so then my body relaxes, but if I need to make an urgent call, then the sensation or contraction becomes stronger until thought labels it anger. I don't see how the phone not working directly causes the sensation, it's like an intuitive recognition. An understanding without thought. And my body responds. The other way sensation is created is through memory or images. An image off one of my children comes to mind and there is the open relaxed feeling (happiness). But an image of me having a blood test next week would cause an uncomfortable sensation. Again I cannot see how this happens. An image arises and the sensation either follows very quickly or maybe at the same time. It's Intuitive or spontaneous.
. How is thing/object/even actually making you calm or peaceful? What does the object itself doing to you?
What is the AE of something being peaceful or relaxing?
Sitting in a park. There is no contraction of tension. A feeling of openness around the chest area, my muscles in my body feel relaxed. Thoughts arise, this is nice, the flowers are beautiful, it's so peaceful etc....I don't know how sitting in the park creates the sensation of peace. The sensation just happens as I'm looking around the park. It just happens spontaneously.

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 4678
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Die before you die

Postby Vivien » Thu May 09, 2019 4:56 am

Hi Rachel,

Great looking!
Is there anything about emotions that we haven’t covered and you would like to look at?

The reason why we do these exercises is to see how much of our experience is distorted by thoughts, concepts and mental images. So the purpose of these exercises to notice that there is a conceptual overlay, which is not the actual reality itself. They distort and colour or perception. And from there, we cannot see what is really actually happening, since we see everything through this conceptual overlay. So we look at the overlay and don’t even notice the actual experience ‘behind’ it. Thus we mistake the overlay with ‘reality’, with what is really going on. Can you see this?

But the aim of these exercise is not to stop these overlays from appearing, but rather to see them for what they really are. The overlay of in itself is not problematic, as long as we see that it’s just an overlay.

Observe this:
Say out loud the word ‘I’ several times. At the same time try to trace back where the word ‘I’ point to. Try to localise where is the ‘I’ seem to be exactly.
You can observe that whenever the word ‘I’ is said or even thought about the focus of attention goes automatically to the bodily sensations (usually to the eyes, or behind the eyes, or forehead, maybe to the throat, and sometimes to the chest). So there is a direct, automatic association between the word ‘I’ and the felt sensations of the body. Can you see this?

You can also try this:
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?

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
Rachszk
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2019 8:18 am

Re: Die before you die

Postby Rachszk » Thu May 09, 2019 9:04 pm

.
Is there anything about emotions that we haven’t covered and you would like to look at?
Hi,

No I can't think of anything.

[
Say out loud the word ‘I’ several times. At the same time try to trace back where the word ‘I’ point to. Try to localise where is the ‘I’ seem to be exactly.
You can observe that whenever the word ‘I’ is said or even thought about the focus of attention goes automatically to the bodily sensations (usually to the eyes, or behind the eyes, or forehead, maybe to the throat, and sometimes to the chest). So there is a direct, automatic association between the word ‘I’ and the felt sensations of the body. Can you see this?/
Yes there is a felt sense of I in the chest or often behind the eyes.

.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?

It's pointing to my chest.I can feel a mild contraction or tightness in the centre of my chest. When the felt sense of I is in the head behind the eyes then there is a contracted (but not uncomfortable) feeling. But returning to the chest, it's just a contracted feeling right in the centre. I can't exactly locate the depth of it or how big it is.

Rachel

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 4678
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Die before you die

Postby Vivien » Fri May 10, 2019 5:48 am

Hi Rachel,

Although, the illusion of the self is seen through, the ‘sense of me’ still arises due to a life-time of conditioning.
There are several 'sense of me'-s:

- a sense of me in the chest and stomach area that feels
- a sense of me in the forehead (or somewhere in the skull) that thinks
- a sense of me behind the eyes that sees (both ‘visual sight’ and ‘mental images’)
- a sense of me in the ears that hears (both 'real' and imagined sounds)
- a sense of me in the throat that speaks (even when speaking happens only in thought)
- a sense of me in the hands as a toucher

And probably there are more. But all of these are nothing more than sensations that are mistaken to be ‘me’ and the source of particular perceptions (image, thought, sensation, sound, etc.).

It’s really worth investigating all of these, one-by-one.

Probably the most convincing one are the sense of seer. The sense of seer seemingly resides either in the eyes or behind the eyes. So the so called ‘visual sight’ is observed from this point of view. But what is this point of view exactly?

It's believed that both the 'visual sight' and 'mental images' are coming from the eyes, because when it's investigated the attention automatically goes to the sensation 'of the eyes', and sometimes the image 'of the eyes' also appear with it.

But what are the eyes in the actual experience?
Are there anything to the eyes other than sensations and images (of ‘eyes’)?


Please investigate this in a similar way as you did with the notion of ‘thoughts coming from the head’. Do it with BOTH ‘visual sights’ and ‘mental images’.

When there is either a visual sight or a mental image, immediately try to trace back to the feeling sensation to the ‘eyes’ or ‘behind the eyes’ (or whatever is the most prominent)
You can observe that when the attention is on the sensation of the ‘eyes’, a mental image of eyes might also appears (or not).

(a) While keeping the attention on the felt sensation (of the eyes) ask the question:
Can sight / mental image come from a sensation?
Then stop and just LOOK. Don’t try to analyse it or make logical concussions. Just feel the sensation and look.

(b) While keeping the attention on the felt sensation (of the eyes) ask the question:
Can sight / mental image come from an image (of ‘eyes’)?

(c) While keeping the attention on the felt sensation (of the eyes) ask the question:
Can this sensation see? Is this sensation doing the seeing of the ‘sight’?

Try very hard to experience the act of ‘seeing’.
Where does the act of seeing take place (locally)?

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
Rachszk
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2019 8:18 am

Re: Die before you die

Postby Rachszk » Fri May 10, 2019 8:43 pm

.
But what are the eyes in the actual experience?
Are there anything to the eyes other than sensations and images (of ‘eyes’)?
In ae the eyes are sensation, and if I think of eyes I can see an image of my eyes.
.Can sight / mental image come from a sensation?
No sight can't come from sensation.

. Can sight / mental image come from an image (of ‘eyes’)?
No.
. Can this sensation see? Is this sensation doing the seeing of the ‘sight’?
No the sensation cannot see. And the sensation of eyes is not doing the seeing.
.Where does the act of seeing take place (locally)?
In actual experience through my eyes., 'I see through my eyes', that is the thought that arises. I think eyes are just a medium between the outside world and my brain. But there is a sense that 'i see'', like I am seperate to the seeing,. Because sight/seeing just is, eyes open and objects are seen, but that doesn't seem quite right, more like 'seeing happens' (even with my eyes closed), as the word 'see' implies a seperate seer. But I'm not sure if I'm going off on a tangent here. But it seems the seperate seer, or belief that I am the seer is more the issue. It's the same with any felt sense of a me say in the chest or wherever, there is feeling or rather a belief that I am seperate from what is happening, that somehow I am just slightly outside of the process. But I am starting to wonder if this is the case. Maybe there isn't a 'me' that is seperate from everything that is happening. Maybe that me is just a thought,a label on sensation. Sorry if this is a bit rambling. It's just what arose while doing this exercise.

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 4678
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Die before you die

Postby Vivien » Sat May 11, 2019 2:12 am

Hi Rachel,
V: Where does the act of seeing take place (locally)?
R: In actual experience through my eyes.
Seeing through the eyes is NOT the actual experience. It’s just a learned knowledge which does not correspond with the direct experience. But it might be hard to see, since we look at everything through the tinted glasses of concepts and beliefs. So we see the concept, so to speak, and not what is really happening.
'I see through my eyes', that is the thought that arises. I think eyes are just a medium between the outside world and my brain.
Yes, this is the scientific explanation, but NOT the actual experience.
But there is a sense that 'i see'', like I am separate to the seeing,.
This is the sense that “I see” what needs to be found!
If there is a ‘me’ that sees, it has to be there! It has to be found!
Otherwise, it’s a nice story, a fantasy only, like unicorns.
Because sight/seeing just is, eyes open and objects are seen, but that doesn't seem quite right, more like 'seeing happens' (even with my eyes closed), as the word 'see' implies a seperate seer.
Let’s try this out.

With open eyes, look forward and just see whatever is there. Don’t pay too much attention to the sight, but rather to the seeming ‘seer’.

Notice, that it seems and ‘feels’ as the visual sight is in front of this body, especially in front of the face and the head.
Observe very carefully. What makes this sense or feeling of the sight being in front of the eyes/head/body?

Now, focus the attention to the sense or feeling of the ‘seer’. It seems to be somewhere inside the head.
Investigate every corner of the head, and look for the ‘seer’. If the seer exists, it has to be there somewhere. Where is it?

Close your eyes, and have a mental image. Hold the image, don’t pay too much attention to the image itself, but rather investigate the ‘I’ that is supposedly seeing it.

Notice that although the eyes are closed it STILL seems and FEELS AS IF the mental image is in front of the eyes/head/body.
What makes this sense or feeling that the mental images is happening in front of the eyes/head?
If the eyes are closed the image obviously cannot in front of the eyes/face. But still it seems like. What an amazing illusion! Can you see this?

Now, focus the attention to the sense or feeling of the ‘seer’ while still holding the mental image. It seems to be somewhere inside the head.
Investigate every corner of the head, and look for the ‘seer’. If the seer exists, it has to be there somewhere. Where is it?
But it seems the seperate seer, or belief that I am the seer is more the issue.
This belief is supported by mistaking certain sensations as me. So you always have to look for the sensations that seems to be the me, and investigate that what makes that sensation a me. And you have to do this many many times, in order to really get it.
It's the same with any felt sense of a me say in the chest or wherever, there is feeling or rather a belief that I am seperate from what is happening, that somehow I am just slightly outside of the process.
Focus the attention on a sensation, and keep it there. At the same time, ask:
Where is the feeler? – and scan through every part of the body for the feeler. Look into the armpits, the upper back, lower back, behind the ears, the back of the head, into the mouth, the forehead, the top of the head, to the throat, into the neck, everywhere.

If there is a feeler, it has to be there somewhere! Where is it?
But I am starting to wonder if this is the case. Maybe there isn't a 'me' that is seperate from everything that is happening. Maybe that me is just a thought,a label on sensation.
It’s great if you can entertain the possibility that there isn’t a me that is separate from everything. So now really look if this is true. What do 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
Rachszk
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2019 8:18 am

Re: Die before you die

Postby Rachszk » Sat May 11, 2019 11:16 am

. What makes this sense or feeling of the sight being in front of the eyes/head/body?


I don't think sight is Infront of the body just objects. My mind creates an image of my body and somehow I don't know how but objects are placed in relation to this. In ae I'm not sure where 'sight' is. There is seeing (perhaps that is sight) and spatial awareness created by the brain. Seeing comes from behind the eyes, from the seer.

. [/quote]
. I nvestigate every corner of the head, and look for the ‘seer’. If the seer exists, it has to be there somewhere. Where is it? [/quote]

No, there's no seer just a strong sensation of a focal point. It actually feels like seeing is taking place behind the eyes or through the eye. There is a sensation in the head, this is the feeling of the focal point. It's a mi!d contracted /or heavy feeling .

. What makes this sense or feeling that the mental images is happening in front of the eyes/head?
If the eyes are closed the image obviously cannot in front of the eyes/face. But still it seems like. What an amazing illusion! Can you see this?
Yes that is clever. It feels as if the image is in front of me as if it is still in front of my eyes.
.Now, focus the attention to the sense or feeling of the ‘seer’ while still holding the mental image. It seems to be somewhere inside the head.
Investigate every corner of the head, and look for the ‘seer’. If the seer exists, it has to be there somewhere. Where is it?
There is just the sensation of a focal point or attention and an image that my mind seems to be able to project out in front of the sensation of the focal point. I know we looked at the focal point before, and I know it's a sensation, and I can see that it just chops and changes location, even if I think 'focus on my foot' it happens but I can't physically 'move' or change 'attention'. So then I think well how do I know the focal point or the image, arr! Off course 'i am the knower', if I keep tracing back I always come to the knower'. The knower' is the seer, although I'm not sure what the knower' is, sorry we might have covered this before, so the knower' or awareness.
.
If there is a feeler, it has to be there somewhere! Where is it?
There is knowing of feelins, something knows feeling and sensations and thoughts, the knowing is me. Although I can see knowing isn't seperate from what is known it can't be, but itt still seems like knowing can exist without something to know, like awareness exists independently, but I don't know if that's just a thought or imagination.
. It’s great if you can entertain the possibility that there isn’t a me that is separate from everything. So now really look if this is true. What do you find?
Anxiety! Racing thoughts that say there must be an independent me somewhere, if there isn't then 'i' don't exist and that in a way is the end of 'me'. A seperate individual, in control of her life, making decisions, having experience, and in one sense it feels very freeing, very relaxing, like letting go into what is, but perhaps I am being a bit melodramatic here I don't know, it's that death thing that comes up, I don't want to die or to not exist! I do want to see 'no me' but I want there to be another 'me' that pops up, and I'm sure there will generally always be some sense or semblance of 'me' to hold this whole thing together, but if it is truly seen through and it is known to be only sensation or belief, if the spell is broken so to speak, well I suppose it's unknown, to actually know what it's like to live without the belief , but it does make me feel anxious. Because maybe when this body mind ends that's it. Knowing the knower' and known are not seperate feels like ending the last vestige of hope that I will exist after death.

Thanks Rachel

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 4678
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Die before you die

Postby Vivien » Sun May 12, 2019 3:51 am

Hi Rachel,
I don't think sight is Infront of the body just objects.
The objects are the sight itself.

Sight is an image. Both mental image and visual image are just images.
Because maybe when this body mind ends that's it. Knowing the knower' and known are not seperate feels like ending the last vestige of hope that I will exist after death.
I don't want to die or to not exist!
All right. Let’s just suspend the looking for a bit, and just investigate this fear.

Imagine the entity who is afraid of dying and not existing. You can have a conversation with her. Ask her:

Why is it so important to exist after the death of the body?
What is so fearful about the notion that after the death ‘I won’t exist’?

Why is it so important to exist at all?
What is the problem with not existing?

Just imagine, is it painful not to exist?


Entertain the possibility for a few minutes, how would feel if after death there is no more existing.

Would that be painful not to exist? – not now, but after the death of the body

Would that be fearful not to exist? – not now, but after the death of the body

Would there be any problem with not existing?

If there is no 'me' at all, then what is that could die?


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
Rachszk
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2019 8:18 am

Re: Die before you die

Postby Rachszk » Sun May 12, 2019 2:07 pm

. The objects are the sight itself.
Hi Vivian

Do you mean you can't seperate sight from object , so they are 'one'
. Sight is an image. Both mental image and visual image are just images.
I know a visual image doesn't exist in reality it's created by the brain. I know that our perception of objects is created by the brain. But I still think there is difference between a mental image and a visual image, as the visual image is of something that exists in reality. So I can create a visual image of my dog with my eyes closed, but if I open my eyes and see her lying down I don't understand how that is just an image?
. Why is it so important to exist after the death of the body?
What is so fearful about the notion that after the death ‘I won’t exist’?
The only thing that comes up is that I don't want to stop experiencing.
.
Why is it so important to exist at all?
What is the problem with not existing?
There won't be any problem when I no longer exist. I know I won't feel or know anything. But knowing that fate awaits me, does bring with it a slight feeling of pointlessness or meaningless.
. Just imagine, is it painful not to exist?

No.
.
Would that be painful not to exist? – not now, but after the death of the body

Would that be fearful not to exist? – not now, but after the death of the body

Would there be any problem with not existing?
No there is no problem with not existing after I no longer exist.
.
If there is no 'me' at all, then what is that could die?
Yes, I realise I am seeing this with the belief still that there is a me. Usually in life I put thoughts of death to the back of my mind. I accept I can't know but for some reason when I start to do this type of looking it brings it back up. I do understand if death is oblivion, then there's no problem in death itself, there is no suffering, no joy, no love nothing. It ends the good and the bad. It is a problem to the living being now, who doesn't want experience to end, if experience ends 'i' end . I know it's childish to continue to say 'i don't want ...' something that has to happen, so I am trying my best now to really accept this and be at peace with it so I can continue the looking without this hindrance arising. Just as actual physical death could well be the end of 'me' so discovering 'no self' is also the end of me, even though all the pieces that were once believed to be 'me' or somehow contain a me are still here in this material world, the essential belief of my existence will have gone and i know it's not exactly the same as physical end of life but there are some similarities. Maybe I am actually afraid to see 'no self' even though I do want to see this I think I'm afraid and my mind is equating it with my fear of death. But I don't want to be sidetracked by this I feel very serious about seeing this through, and not getting stuck on this issue. So I feel like I will just have to go through this fear , the reality is I don't know what ,'no self' is like and I don't know what death is like, so whatever fear arises, I'll have to just see it as fear, a thought and a sensation , and continue the looking'.

Thanks Rachel

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 4678
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Die before you die

Postby Vivien » Mon May 13, 2019 3:01 am

Hi Rachel,
It is a problem to the living being now, who doesn't want experience to end, if experience ends 'i' end . I know it's childish to continue to say 'i don't want ...' something that has to happen, so I am trying my best now to really accept this and be at peace with it
This story that ‘I don’t want stop existing’ is said on behalf of a separate self, which ALREADY DOESN’T EXIST.
So there is nothing behind this sentence. It’s a thought, but the person, the self, whom this thought is about, is not there! LOOK! Look for the one how doesn’t want to stop existing! Look and look and look. Look until it’s clear that there is nothing there, only thoughts and sensations. Nothing else.

THERE IS NO YOU. – Is this true?
Just as actual physical death could well be the end of 'me' so discovering 'no self' is also the end of me
There is a big BELIEF hiding here! The belief that by seeing no-self the self will stop existing, that the self will die.
But this self CANNOT DIE. Since there has NEVER EVER BEEN a YOU! Never!
Rachel, as an entity has never ever existed.
So by seeing no-self, there is nothing that could die! Nothing. An illusion cannot die.
And even the illusion of the you won’t stop appearing. The illusion of the self will still go on. Just as before.
The only thing that changes is the perception of the self. The knowing, that this seeming Rachel is just an illusion, like a mirage in the desert. Nothing more.

It’s similar when you’re watching a movie which is so enchanting that you completely forget that you’re in a movie theatre, sitting in a chair, watching images projected onto the screen. It totally seems like and feels like as if you’re in scenes of the movie together with the characters. And then suddenly, you ‘wake up’ from this illusion. But the movie will still go on. You just discover that the whole movie is just a fantasy. But the movie will go on, it won’t stop appearing. So there is only a perception shift. This is the same with seeing through the self.

Seeing no self is just a shift in perception, like with these images bellow. As if you were seeing only in one way for your whole life, and now there’s a shift, and you can see from a different perspective. But you can still see the original, old version too. From now on, you can switch back and forth between the two.
Image
Image

There has never ever been a you. Can you see this?
But I don't want to be sidetracked by this I feel very serious about seeing this through, and not getting stuck on this issue. So I feel like I will just have to go through this fear , the reality is I don't know what ,'no self' is like and I don't know what death is like, so whatever fear arises, I'll have to just see it as fear, a thought and a sensation , and continue the looking'.
It's good that you’re determined to continue looking. This is all that matters.

And about the fear: when fearful thoughts come up, those are just thoughts.
Also, there are certain sensations presents, but those are just the AE of sensations, but not the fear itself.
Try to find the fear itself. Not the sensation, since the sensation is clearly just a sensation.

Rather try to find THE ‘fear’. Feel THE ‘fear’. Not the sensation, but the fear itself. What do you find?
Do you mean you can't seperate sight from object , so they are 'one'
Yes, exactly. Can you separate the sight from the object?
Can one exist without the other?
I know a visual image doesn't exist in reality it's created by the brain. I know that our perception of objects is created by the brain
Conventionally speaking it is true. But you’ve never ever experienced visual images being created by the brain. You just learned this information, what you have never directly experienced and taken on as a truth. But actually it’s a belief. Whatever we cannot directly experience is a belief, ultimately.

And yes, there are many useful beliefs (concepts), just as the scientific explanation of thought being produced by the brain. But when we investigate the self, we cannot get anywhere with conventional ‘truths’. Since conventional truths are the results of thinking, which is exactly what is creating the illusion of the self, by creating concepts. We have to look ‘behind’ this conceptual overlay, and see what is really there without concepts.

Conventionally speaking the brain producing thoughts and images is a useful concept, just as many other concepts. But when we want to see through the illusion, we cannot use the same tool which created the illusion itself.
But I still think there is difference between a mental image and a visual image, as the visual image is of something that exists in reality. So I can create a visual image of my dog with my eyes closed, but if I open my eyes and see her lying down I don't understand how that is just an image?
We will come back to this later.

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
Rachszk
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2019 8:18 am

Re: Die before you die

Postby Rachszk » Mon May 13, 2019 10:38 pm

Hi
. THERE IS NO YOU. – Is this true?
Yes that's true. But it still hasn't clicked completely.
. There has never ever been a you. Can you see this?
I can see that that makes sense, but I don't really ' know' it yet. I can keep breaking down every piece that says 'i' and see that there is no 'i' but it still hasn't all come together if that makes sense.

.
Rather try to find THE ‘fear’. Feel THE ‘fear’. Not the sensation, but the fear itself. What do you find?
I know if I look I can't find 'fear'.

. . Can you separate the sight from the object?
Can one exist without the other
No I can't seperate sight from object. Can one exist without the other? Not in the actual experience of sight no.

Thanks Rachel

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 4678
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: Die before you die

Postby Vivien » Tue May 14, 2019 4:00 am

Hi Rachel,
I can see that that makes sense, but I don't really ' know' it yet. I can keep breaking down every piece that says 'i' and see that there is no 'i' but it still hasn't all come together if that makes sense.
No problem. We will investigate this as long as it takes. The only way to fail is stop looking. So you just have to keep going.

Now let’s go back to the topic of awareness. You wrote this previously:
Off course 'i am the knower', if I keep tracing back I always come to the knower'. The knower' is the seer, although I'm not sure what the knower' is, sorry we might have covered this before, so the knower' or awareness.
In language there is assumption that there must be a subject (me) that is doing or having the object (thoughts). But this assumption is coming only from language, in the actual experience there is neither subject nor object that could be found.

We say “It’s raining” – where is this ‘it’? Water is simply falling. Or, “The wind is blowing” – can you find ‘the wind’ or is it just air moving? We also say “I’m thinking” – but is there really an ‘I’ that is doing something or are thoughts simply arising? Have a look and see.

We also say: “I am aware of my thoughts” – but is there really something that is doing the aware-ing (knowing) of thoughts?
Where is this knower exactly? – if it exists, it has to be there somewhere. Find it.
There is knowing of feelins, something knows feeling and sensations and thoughts, the knowing is me. Although I can see knowing isn't seperate from what is known it can't be, but itt still seems like knowing can exist without something to know, like awareness exists independently, but I don't know if that's just a thought or imagination.
Pay attention to whatever is happening right now. There could be sounds, sensations, thoughts, smells, tastes, sights, mental images, etc.

Now, try to remove them one-by-one, until only pure awareness remains.

If there is such thing as awareness, then it can be experienced directly without any object of experience.
Nothing else, just pure knowing, pure aware-ing.
No sound, no thought, no sensation, no sight, nothing, just knowing.

What is left of awareness if all the objects (sight, sound, smell, taste, sensation, thought) are removed?

In order to stay that there is a stand-alone, independently existent awareness, then that awareness has to exists without any appearance…. So that awareness has to be there, even when there is no thought, sensation, smell, image, sound, taste, no experience at all is present.

So can a stand-alone, independent awareness being aware itself only, if there is no experience at all?
If yes, what would that be like? – even answering this question, requires lots of fantasy…

Have you ever had the experience of ‘awareness being aware of itself’ without any object (no experience at all)?


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 “ARCHIVES”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest