The real seeing

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
Bella
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 3:50 pm

The real seeing

Postby Bella » Wed May 01, 2019 3:52 pm

LU is focused guiding for seeing there is no real, inherent 'self' - what do you understand by this?
Self, or ego, is an idea that experiences, including thoughts, are owned by someone, a me. It is possible to see this illusion for yourself. But it is very hard to do that on your own. I think the guide helps to distinguish the difference between believing and actually seeing/knowing the truth of this.

What are you looking for at LU?
I want to ask for someone to help me mop up. 5 years ago I read the gateless gatecrashers (great title!). After a very intense 2 weeks I clearly spotted a thought arising where the I idea was being formed. Understanding arose. That was great, but I didn’t experience a shift or a reboot. That is why I kept asking myself for a while whether this could be all of it? On the other hand. There was no doubt at all that what I saw clearly profed what the selfingprocess was and that the idea of me is nothing more than a thought. There was much more clarity and understanding happening. And so much changed in my life after that too. But after 5 years I notice still so much selfing happening. Followed by owning the thought (or experience) happening. So much even that I seem to forget (or not being aware of) that the self is only an idea, not real. As if it keeps sticking. As if the knowing is possessed by the mind (which is not the self of course). In that case “I” am deceiving myself. So intellectually, there is no doubt at all about there not being a self, but in direct experience selfing happens and needs to be noticed before it can drop again. I am not sure that direct seeing happened deeply enough, that there is more to look at that needs to be seen to be freed of ego’s power/deception.

What do you expect from a guided conversation?
I hope that the guided conversation can help me focus more in the lookingprocess. And also finding the weak spot, where there might be a hint of belief in self left. Especially the combination of the different aspects that I have looked in to and seen through before is what I hope will happen. It is as if all the different aspects are seen through as not being the self, but the whole of it is not seen through. As if there still is something left over that is overlooked. I hope the guide will help me clear this up.

What is your experience in terms of spiritual practices, seeking and inquiry?
practising buddhism for + 20 years

On a scale from 1 to 10, how willing are you to question any currently held beliefs about 'self?
11

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 2725
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: The real seeing

Postby Vivien » Fri May 03, 2019 12:12 am

Hi Bella,

My name is Vivien, and I am happy to assist in exploring 'no-self' and other related topics.

You and I will simply have a conversation, but this process is essentially an extension of your own inquiry. It is 'guided' so that specific areas may be examined.

I am not a teacher. This is YOUR inquiry. I will not be giving you new ideas and beliefs; only assisting you in examining and questioning the ones that you already have.

Before we begin, here are links to information I would like you to read please.
Disclaimer:-
http://liberationunleashed.com/disclaimer-2/

Terms & Conditions:
https://www.liberationunleashed.com/register/terms/

“Liberation Unleashed is not …” in the FAQ’s of LU.
http://liberationunleashed.com/about/faq/#faq-1041

A few ground rules:
1. Post at least once a day, if you cannot post, or need more time, please let me know.
2. Be 100% honest in your answers and inquiry.
3. This exploration is based on Actual (or Direct) Experience (AE or DE) - smell, taste, sound, sensation, color and thoughts - only. Long-winded analytical and philosophical answers are best avoided and may even hinder progress. This is not a self-improvement process. There is no ‘self’ to improve.
4. Put aside all other teachings, philosophies and such for the remainder of this investigation. Really put all your effort and attention in to seeing this reality, as it is. If you have a daily and essential meditation practice, it is fine to continue that.
5. Understand that I will be guiding you, rather than teaching you, and the more you put into this process the more you will get out of it.

A few technical support:

- You can reply to this thread by pushing the 'Post Reply" button at the left bottom of this page.
- You can learn to use the quote function, instructions are located in the link below this line:

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=660


Technology is not perfect and sometimes there is a glitch which can wipe out your responses. It is advisable that you copy and paste questions asked into Word, answer them there and then copy and paste them to your thread. Always save a copy of what you have done, it will save time in the long run.


If you are happy to agree to the above and have me your guide, we can start the process.

To begin with, so that we both become aware of what your expectations are about this exploration (for example, what life will look and feel like and what you want/hope will change or not change). Could you please answer the following questions:

How will Life change?
How will you change?
What will be different?
What is missing?

Throughout this exploration I would like you to answer ALL questions that I have written in blue text. Please answer questions INDIVIDUALLY, remembering to use the Quote function to highlight the question being answered.

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
Bella
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 3:50 pm

Re: The real seeing

Postby Bella » Fri May 03, 2019 7:17 am

Hi Vivien,

Thanks for your answer and your willingness to take me on. I agree to the terms. Tonight I will formulate answers to your 4 questions.

Bella

User avatar
Bella
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 3:50 pm

Re: The real seeing

Postby Bella » Fri May 03, 2019 7:22 pm

Hi Vivien,

Here are my answers.
How will Life change?
Life will not change. Seeing means just that. In itself it won’t change anything. But because of knowing, responses will change, and in that way life will change. That is my experience so far.
How will you change?
I will change according to what the new outlook will look like. What do I mean here? Lets use the santa Claus analogy. Right now I sometimes get lost in the story of the self. The power of the selfing is so big that I act like I do believe. When awareness arrives, I need to think, to remember that there is no self. After that, the energy drops. And I know there is no self and never has been. When I meet Santa, my whole being knows he is not real, whatever the level of awareness. I don’t need to wait for awareness to arrive and I certainly don’t have to think before I remember he is not real.
After 5 years I got used to this way of seeing things. But there is also this desperately wanting it to be true. So where stops the knowing and starts the believing? And vice versa? Where how do I have to look?
What will be different? 
So that is what will be different (I hope/expect). That in every situation the awareness is present that the self doesn’t exist. There will be clarity about where there is belief and where there is seeing/knowing..
. What is missing?
Doubt wil be missing. I will be completely sure of the fact that there are only phenomena arising and that there is no-one steering that.
Or does your question mean something else? What is missing right now in my understanding/experience? The answer is space, a sense of space and lightness, ease and relaxation that I experience when I am in touch with the now. I hope that the power of constant thoughts will deminish because it is seen through as a story instead of believed in as a truth. That can be so cramped.
I am aware these are expectations. And those surfacing is what led me to my doubts, is what led me to you.

Bella

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 2725
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: The real seeing

Postby Vivien » Sat May 04, 2019 1:59 am

Hi Bella,
Thank you for your responses. Your responses are important, because every expectation is in a way of seeing what is here, right now. Every expectation is a ‘hindrance’ in realizing what IS. Expectations are about the future. But seeing what IS cannot be ‘found’ in the future.

I go through all the expectations. While you read them, please pay attention to what arises ‘in the body’. Is there any resistance to any of it?
I will change according to what the new outlook will look like. What do I mean here? Lets use the santa Claus analogy. Right now I sometimes get lost in the story of the self. The power of the selfing is so big that I act like I do believe. When awareness arrives, I need to think, to remember that there is no self. After that, the energy drops. And I know there is no self and never has been.
This is totally normal. Just because the illusion of the self is seen through, it doesn’t mean that the illusion, or being lost in the illusion as if it were real, would never happen again. And it’s not a problem. It’s the result of a lifetime of conditioning, and lots and lots of looking is needed to dissolve it completely.

Suffering happens when being lost in thoughts happens. It means that the thoughts in that moment are not seen only as arising thoughts (only as ‘containers’ coming and going), but rather they ‘content’, what they are about is taken as reality. And of course, since each thought is about the self, the self is taken as something real. And this, let’s call ‘delusion’ still can happen even after seeing the illusion of the self. But when it’s investigated, it can be seen for what it is. But there is no guaranty that in the next moment the story of a self won’t reassert itself. It’s a habit of the mind. It’s a conditioned pattern of thinking. It’s the result of a life-long conditioning. But upon each looking it gets a little bit weaker and weaker.

Also, personality problems, traumas, emotional pains don’t dissolve just because of seeing no self. So all the conditioned reactions that stem from them still can arise. However, if someone decides to work on these, it’s usually much easier after seeing no-self.
When I meet Santa, my whole being knows he is not real, whatever the level of awareness. I don’t need to wait for awareness to arrive and I certainly don’t have to think before I remember he is not real.
You mentioned in your introduction that you’ve been practicing Buddhism for more than 20 years. So I assume that you’re familiar with the Buddhist four stages of awakening. What you described here, is the final stage (fourth stage) of awakening. In Buddhist terms, it’s the stage of Arahantship, when no more identification or clinging to the self ever happens, and the inner peace cannot be disturbed by anything, no matter what happens. But even with this stage the so called ‘negative’ emotions (like grief, sadness) might arise, but without any attachment, clinging to them, and without any suffering.

Awakening starts with ‘stream entry’, which is the result of seeing that there is no inherently existing self as an agency. This seeing cannot be taken away. However, the illusion still can be taken as a reality, and sometimes it could seem as if there is still a separate self. But when it looked at closely, it’s clear that there is nothing there. As someone goes through the stage of awakening, this sense of self gets weaker and weaker, but it dissolves only at the final stage, called Arahantship. So with the first stage (where we usually guide to here at LU), might bring some or lots of relief, and lessening of suffering, but the sense of self after stream entry still can arise (and arises in almost all cases). But there is a difference between the ‘sense of self’ and believing in the inherent existence of a self. But although, seeing that the self is just an illusion cannot be taken away, moments of ‘delusion’ still happen, but after further looking it’s easy to see that there is no self to cling to.
That in every situation the awareness is present that the self doesn’t exist. There will be clarity about where there is belief and where there is seeing/knowing..
So this would be the final stage, and lots of further looking is needed for the conditioning of self-clinging to fall away. And many people are not persistent and perseverant enough with further inquiries to ‘get there’. And even at this stage not all conditioning is completely gone, unlearning can last to the end of the organism. So it’s rather a never ending unfolding process. (Of course, there is no place or real stage to get to, but language fails here.)
Doubt wil be missing. I will be completely sure of the fact that there are only phenomena arising and that there is no-one steering that.
OK, doubt could definitely dissolve, in spite of the seeming illusion reoccurring.

So, what I suggest that we examine the self from every possible angle. We will look everywhere. And we will also investigate other aspects of the self, like control, decision, body, ‘sense of self being located’ in the body, emotions, time, and most importantly thoughts. Since thoughts are one of the biggest reasons for this illusion. So we will look at thoughts very deeply. We will do this until there is no doubt left of the existence of an inherent separate self. And still, the sense of self probably still will arise. But that’s all right.

But before starting, please report what came up reading the comments about the expectations.
Was there any resistance to any of it?


So, what we are going to do is that I’ll give you some exercises, physical ones, in which I will ask you to describe the experience of the senses. We call this direct experience, or the uninterpreted moment. This refers to the data from the sensations themselves, before the mind tries to make sense of it and begins to describe what is happening. Observing with the five senses — seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching/feeling. These exercises can help to see what is ‘real’ and what is not.

So, the first thing to investigate is to find out what you currently believe yourself to be.
This should be kept very simple and should not be anything requiring in-depth analysis or thought.

The standard view of 'I', 'me' is that of a person - A body with a mind.
The standard view is that 'I' refers to this body that appears here in awareness. I am this body. Also 'I' have control over this body.
Since 'I' am this body, 'I' see, 'I' hear, 'I' feel, etc - I perform all the senses.
This body was born - It will live a number of years - And then it (I) will die.

Feel free to reject what I have suggested if they don't match what you currently believe yourself to be.

Currently, would it be fair to say that you believe that currently you are a person sitting in a chair, looking at a computer screen and reading words off it right now?

What does the word 'I' point to?
What makes this body ‘yours’?
What makes this body ‘you’?


I will write all questions in blue, please always answer ALL of them. These questions are pointers where to LOOK. Of course, you can also reply to any other parts of my posts if you feel need to.

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
Bella
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 3:50 pm

Re: The real seeing

Postby Bella » Sat May 04, 2019 4:05 pm

Hi Vivian,

Great pointers! Thanks.
Is there any resistance to any of it?
.But before starting, please report what came up reading the comments about the expectations.
Was there any resistance to any of it?
No, there was no resistance at all. Only relief.
Makes sense. And your proposal is exactly what I want. I even jumped in the air from joy.
.The standard view of 'I', 'me' is that of a person - A body with a mind.
The standard view is that 'I' refers to this body that appears here in awareness. I am this body. Also 'I' have control over this body.
Since 'I' am this body, 'I' see, 'I' hear, 'I' feel, etc - I perform all the senses.
This body was born - It will live a number of years - And then it (I) will die.
Currently, would it be fair to say that you believe that currently you are a person sitting in a chair, looking at a computer screen and reading words off it right now?
The normal views you describe do still surface, but are not my view anymore. They don’t feel right, but actually I don’t pay attention to them. But the view is not replaced. I just haven’t thought about it.

This is what actually happened after I started to think about what my view could be: If you ask “are you a person sitting there?” It doesn’t fit. No! Cramped feeling in the throat. Also a feeling in the belly and heart area. Is it sadness? Fear? Do I really believe this? There is a temptation to believe the thought, to cling to it. But than revulsion. No!
There is no me here! Again sadness. What am I? Feeling arising. Experience of tactile feeling in the belly-heart-throat axis. Who is feeling this? Does owning happen? Than again awareness arising: in direct experience, there is only sensations and thoughts arising. The thoughtcontent is not reality.
.What does the word “I” point to?
The word I points to sensations happening and thereafter owning those. So in direct experience, there are only sensations of the senses. Or a thought coming up with the content “I am … those sensations”.

This was happening during the looking:
The word I points to a bunch of feelings, currently felt in the belly-heart-throat axis and also inside the rest of the body as tactile sensations and outside the body, in the surroundings that are within awareness. It is like there is a reaching out and simultaneously an explosion wanting to burst out from the heartarea. To fill all that space of awareness, but not to own it, but to know it, to experience it. And there is no end to it, which feels overwhelming.(So here was floating away in thoughts happening, but at the time I didn’t notice).
Like the inside and outside want to merge. There is resistance to it because of the idea that there is an inside and outside. Hanging on to the inside, as the core of me, as identification. What does it mean? I want to understand.
Why not let it float there? Who is letting it float? What can be lost? Me? Ha ha
.What makes this body ‘yours’?
This body is my body, because in it there are sensations happening that obviously are observed, experienced. Also thoughts appear with the content “my body, my feelings, my experiences”. But there is no me apart from those experiences and thoughts/thoughtcontents to find in direct experience.
.What makes this body ‘you’?
Memory. Thoughtcontent believed. Identification. Projection. Making a border between the feelings experienced and the projection/thoughtcontent believed.

Looking forward to your respons/pointers

Bella

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 2725
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: The real seeing

Postby Vivien » Sat May 04, 2019 11:55 pm

Hi Bella,
And your proposal is exactly what I want. I even jumped in the air from joy.
It’s good that you have enthusiasm, :) this can help a lot
The word I points to a bunch of feelings, currently felt in the belly-heart-throat axis and also inside the rest of the body as tactile sensations and outside the body, in the surroundings that are within awareness.
What you described here is the sense of self. We will investigate this later.
It is like there is a reaching out and simultaneously an explosion wanting to burst out from the heartarea. To fill all that space of awareness, but not to own it, but to know it, to experience it. And there is no end to it, which feels overwhelming.(So here was floating away in thoughts happening, but at the time I didn’t notice).
Like the inside and outside want to merge. There is resistance to it because of the idea that there is an inside and outside. Hanging on to the inside, as the core of me, as identification.
All right. So there are certain sensations, and thoughts ‘try to understand’ them, and thus ‘creating’ a story about those sensations. So this is not the description of actual experience (AE), but the contents of thoughts.

But that’s all right, this is what thoughts are ABOUT: analyzing, interpreting, and putting everything into categories or into order, and most of all, conceptualizing the actual experience.

But for this investigation we have to stick to the pure experience, BEFORE any thought interpretation. So I will give you exercises, and you just have to look what is there BEFORE thoughts, or WITHOUT thoughts, or if the contents of thoughts are ignored.

So AE is: sounds/hearing, smells/smelling, taste/tasting, sight/seeing, sensation/sensing, and seeing the appearance of a thought.

So then let’s have a deeper look on thoughts. Sit for about 15 minutes and investigate these questions:

Where do thoughts come from?
Where are they going?
Can ‘you’ stop a thought in the middle?
Can ‘you’ predict what will be the next thought?
Can 'you' choose not to have painful or negative thoughts?

Can an 'I' be found that generates thoughts?
“I think” - What is 'I'? What is the one that thinks?
What is the thinker of thoughts?
Does the thinker of the thought appear in experience? Can it be found?
Or could it be that the 'I' that thinks is also just a thought?
Do you think thoughts or you are just ‘being thought’?
Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Including the thought 'I'?


Please go through these questions and answer and quote ALL of them one-by-one. Don’t miss any. Try to answer them only from direct experience, and leave aside all intellectual interpretation or understanding. Please, DON’T THINK about the answers, rather LOOK at what is before thoughts. Take your time.

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
Bella
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 3:50 pm

Re: The real seeing

Postby Bella » Sun May 05, 2019 4:52 pm

Hi Vivien,
.Please, DON’T THINK about the answers, rather LOOK at what is before thoughts.
I have been trying to do what you asked: only looking and answering your questions from what I saw before thought arised and what I saw happening within a thought with “I” appearing (as content) in an arising/arisen thought.
.Where do thoughts come from?
When I am just sitting (without thoughts happening), I can see a thought with content appear from nothing. It just pops up. After that proliferation starts and I am unable to notice where those thoughts come from, because I am lost in their content. So when I notice that, I can let go again and start fresh over with looking. Again, a thought pops up from nowhere.
.Where are they going?
After the thought is delivered, it vanishes. It disappears. Only new, different, thoughts arise. They on their turn also disappear (as if they are exhausted after being noticed/delivered).
.Can ‘you’ stop a thought in the middle?
Not possible. A thought is delivered as a whole. It appears with full content in one flash.
.Can ‘you’ predict what will be the next thought?
Also impossible. The thought pops up, full content. “I” am surprised by its content if I am not immediately lost in proliferation.
.Can 'you' choose not to have painful or negative thoughts?
Same answer. Not possible. A thought appears or not. I can choose to continu a storyline, to think it through as it were, or proliferate on a thought, or not.
.Can an 'I' be found that generates thoughts?
No. The thoughts that are seen to pop up, are certainly not I-generated. Those just appear. Not even the thoughts following the initial thought. As soon as there is an “I” appearing, it is a thoughtcontent. The I is arising within the thought. Not outside it. Outside thoughts there is nothing that generates anything.
.“I think” - What is 'I'? What is the one that thinks?
This I is a content within a thought. So the one that thinks doesn’t exist. It is only thoughtcontent.
.What is the thinker of thoughts?
The thinker of thoughts is itself a thought.
.Does the thinker of the thought appear in experience? Can it be found?
Negative. It only appears as thoughtcontent. When believed, there is a “me”. Of course this “me” is only thoughtcontent
.Or could it be that the 'I' that thinks is also just a thought?
Looking/observing/experiencing happens. There is no-one doing that. It just happens. Than a thought arises and all that happening is being owned. The I that thinks is always/only present as thoughtcontent.
.Do you think thoughts or you are just ‘being thought’?
There is no-one thinking thoughts. Thoughts happen. The content of the thought can be “I am thinking”, but thoughtcontent is not reality, is not direct experience. So my answer to your question is: I’m just being thought.
.Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Including the thought 'I'?
No. Impossible. Thoughts appear, including the I-thought. Not any one thought can be prevented from appearing.

Greetings,
Bella

User avatar
Bella
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 3:50 pm

Re: The real seeing

Postby Bella » Sun May 05, 2019 5:12 pm

Just to be clear: I have not only tried to do what you asked. I have been doing it. I needed some time to get in to clear seeing. But then everything was clearly seen.
Bella

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 2725
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: The real seeing

Postby Vivien » Mon May 06, 2019 2:33 am

Hi Bella,

You did a very nice looking :)
When I am just sitting (without thoughts happening), I can see a thought with content appear from nothing. It just pops up. After that proliferation starts and I am unable to notice where those thoughts come from, because I am lost in their content. So when I notice that, I can let go again and start fresh over with looking. Again, a thought pops up from nowhere.
Yes, you described it beautifully.

Let’s look at the SEEMING process of proliferation.
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"?
The thought pops up, full content. “I” am surprised by its content if I am not immediately lost in proliferation.
“ ‘I’ am surprised by its content” – look for the thing that is surprised, whatever that ‘thing’ would be. What is it? Where is it located exactly?

What is the actual experience of ‘surprise’?
A thought appears or not. I can choose to continu a storyline, to think it through as it were, or proliferate on a thought, or not.
“I can choose to continue a storyline” – what is it exactly that is making the decision?
Where is the ‘chooser’ is located exactly?

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


What can a thought do?
Does a thought have volition?
Can it manipulate other thoughts or think new thoughts?

The content of the thought can be “I am thinking”, but thoughtcontent is not reality, is not direct experience.
All right. Just to make sure that it's totally clear, let's see the difference between the experience of a thought itself, and its content.

Thoughts can be looked at in 2 different ways:
- seeing the CONTENT of a thought, what is a thought ABOUT
- and only seeing the thought itself, as a ‘CONTAINER’.

When a thought is seen only as a container, and the content of a thought (what it’s about) is being ignored, is what we call the actual experience of a thought. Do you see the difference clearly?

Thoughts as arising thoughts (the containers) are ‘real’, but their contents (what they are ABOUT) are not. Like when you think about Dart Vader. There is an arising thought, it cannot be denied, but its content “Dart Vader” is not real. Sometimes thoughts point to something tangible, like chair, however a thought about a chair is not a chair. A thought about a chair is just a mental concept with an arising mental image of a ‘chair’ but that image is not ‘real’. However, as an arising image is there, it is ‘real’, but not its content (what it’s about).

Certain sensations can be felt in the body that is labelled such and such emotion, like ‘cheerful’. However, ‘cheerful’ is just a mental label on the felt sensation. So the felt sensation is ‘real’, the arising mental label, simply as arising label is ‘real’, but its content ‘cheerful’ is just an idea. Can you see this clearly?

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
Bella
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 3:50 pm

Re: The real seeing

Postby Bella » Mon May 06, 2019 7:51 pm

Hi Vivien,

We are really going deeper. Wow.
.Let’s look at the SEEMING process of proliferation.
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"?
Ah, interesting. I hadn't done this before. So looking into the thoughtsequencing I noticed that there are pauses between the thoughts. Part of what I before called "thinking" is waiting for another thought to pop up. I also noticed that diverse thoughts pop up, but they don't have the same energycontent. The one that is most interesting is chosen to subvocalise. That subvocalising is also part of what I before called thinking. But in fact that is not thinking, but subvocalising/talking. In between the subvocalising there are pauses and new thoughts can pop up. There is some direction happening, the choice of topic that I want to think about (I come to this later). Because of that choosing, it SEEMS that there is a sequence in thoughts arising, but in fact it isn't.
So: there is NO sequence in thoughts, nor do they take content from one another, nor are they following seemlessly to oneanother.

.“ ‘I’ am surprised by its content” – look for the thing that is surprised, whatever that ‘thing’ would be. What is it? Where is it located exactly?

What is the actual experience of ‘surprise’?
That recognition of surprise is just another thought arising. It is co-arising with a certain feeling in the body. But it is not itself the feeling. So the feeling is there, felt in the body, a tactile sensation. The thoughtcontent "surprise" is a thoughtcontent. So the feeling is located in the body (although that also can't be pinpoited to an exact location, but that is another matter) and the thoughtcontent doesn't exist in space (or elsewhere in reality), only as thoughtcontent.
The actual experience "surprise" is a tactile sensation.

“I can choose to continue a storyline” – what is it exactly that is making the decision?
Where is the ‘chooser’ is located exactly?.
The decision is being made. It is noticed when executed. Than the thought arises with the content “this is my decision” or something like that.
The chooser is within the thought, or is thoughtcontent. And thus non-existant in actual experience.
It only seems to be so that there is an I that does the choosing. It is such a convincing thought! But looking reveals that in direct experience there is no chooser. There is no choice being made. The choice is made, than noticed.
Could anything be done to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead?
Not at the exact moment. And not as such. As in the questions from yesterday. There is no way to make a thought with a specific content happen on command. There is no-one to do the commanding. So looking for a different thought (thoughtcontent) to appear, is more thoughts happening.
What can a thought do?
In itself nothing. A thought is just a container with a certain content appearing in the mind. As soon as the content is delivered, the thought ceases. That means that the content is gone too. The thought with it’s content is an appearance, a circumstance, a happening with its own effect towards the future. So in direct experience, the thought does nothing.
Does a thought have volition?
That would mean that a thought is an entity in itself. So the answer is no. Volition is also something (not A thing) that happens. It is not a thought. A thought does contain content, but not volition, maybe the word volition.
Can it manipulate other thoughts or think new thoughts?
The thought itself can’t do that. The thought can only be thought. That is all. So it can not manipulate. In fact, it can’t do anything at all.
When a thought is seen only as a container, and the content of a thought (what it’s about) is being ignored, is what we call the actual experience of a thought. Do you see the difference clearly?
Yes. The thought as container points to the process of thinking. The content is what I tend to get caught up in. And when believed, there is a me.
Certain sensations can be felt in the body that is labelled such and such emotion, like ‘cheerful’. However, ‘cheerful’ is just a mental label on the felt sensation. So the felt sensation is ‘real’, the arising mental label, simply as arising label is ‘real’, but its content ‘cheerful’ is just an idea. Can you see this clearly?
Yes. It is the same construction. The tactile sensation in the body is experienced and the thought about it arises, as does the I-thought. The labeling is in fact also thinking, or a thought. (Amazing, everything is accompanied by thoughts, with their content that doesn’t exist in reality). The arising label is the container, the idea ‘cheerful’ the content. Only in this case there is a relation to something happening before the thought. That is one or another sense-based sensation.

Bella

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 2725
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: The real seeing

Postby Vivien » Tue May 07, 2019 2:22 am

Hi Bella,
I also noticed that diverse thoughts pop up, but they don't have the same energycontent.
Thoughts don’t have energycontent. What seems to be energy is nothing else than accompanying sensation. Those sensations add to the ‘reality effect’. They make thoughts seem more real. This is one of the way how the sense of self is created. But we will look at this later when investigating emotions.
The one that is most interesting is chosen to subvocalise. That subvocalising is also part of what I before called thinking. But in fact that is not thinking, but subvocalising/talking.
Yes, this is another way how the sense of self emerges. So there is a thought present, and at the same time the vocal cords get activated, similarly as if those thoughts were said out loud. So there is a thought present, and there is the sensation labelled ‘throat’ or ‘vocal cords’. So the thought is seemingly linked to the body.
Observe this during the day, and let me know what you find.
So the feeling is there, felt in the body, a tactile sensation.
Feelings are not felt in the body. This is just another illusion. We will look at this too, later.
The actual experience "surprise" is a tactile sensation.
A sensation is the actual experience of a sensation, and not the AE of ‘surprise’.
The thought ‘surprise’ is not the AE of ‘surprise’, but the AE of a thought.

Remember, actual experience is: image, sound, sensation, smell, taste, and the experience of thought.
So then, what is the AE of ‘surprise’?
A thought is just a container with a certain content appearing in the mind.
What is the AE of ‘mind’?
The content is what I tend to get caught up in. And when believed, there is a me.
This sentence assumes that there are to ‘me’-s.

- The one that tends to get caught up in thoughts
- And the another one that is created by other caught up in thoughts

So how many me-s do you have? :)

What is it exactly that is being caught up in thoughts?
What does the word ‘I’ in that sentence “I tend to get caught up” points to?

The decision is being made. It is noticed when executed. Than the thought arises with the content “this is my decision” or something like that.
The chooser is within the thought, or is thoughtcontent. And thus non-existant in actual experience.
It only seems to be so that there is an I that does the choosing. It is such a convincing thought! But looking reveals that in direct experience there is no chooser. There is no choice being made. The choice is made, than noticed.
OK, it’s seen that there is no chooser. But this comments implies that there is although no chooser, there is a decision or a choice made.

So what is the AE of ‘decision’?
What is the AE of ‘choice’?


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
Bella
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 3:50 pm

Re: The real seeing

Postby Bella » Tue May 07, 2019 9:17 pm

Hi Vivien,

Thanks for your thorough questioning.
Yes, this is another way how the sense of self emerges. So there is a thought present, and at the same time the vocal cords get activated, similarly as if those thoughts were said out loud. So there is a thought present, and there is the sensation labelled ‘throat’ or ‘vocal cords’. So the thought is seemingly linked to the body. 
Observe this during the day, and let me know what you find.
Difficult to get into this. My inclination towards proliferation is very strong. Then, just quitely sitting, I can notice a lot of sensations from the 5 senses and every now and then a thought popping up. There is mental activity happening, but thoughts are not in all cases so clear as that their content is revealed. And than there is noticing of proliferation, without having noticed the initial thought.
There is both sensation and proliferation happening. I can’t get a good look at a possible (or rather impossible) connection between thought and feeling. I have tried to notice a thought and a feeling co arising, but I couldn’t. The proces goes too quickley. Attention is only directed at one of them at the same time. I also can’t find a relation between the feelings and the thoughtcontent.
So I will go on with this investigation tomorrow.

Unfortunately I haven’t found time today to look into your other questions. I will continue with those also tomorrow.

Bella

User avatar
Vivien
Posts: 2725
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 3:07 am
Location: Australia

Re: The real seeing

Postby Vivien » Wed May 08, 2019 8:46 am

Hi Bella,

Thank you. I'll reply when you are finished with all the questions.

Have a nice day,
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
Bella
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 3:50 pm

Re: The real seeing

Postby Bella » Wed May 08, 2019 4:39 pm

Hi Vivian,

Really enjoyed the seeing today.
So then, what is the AE of ‘surprise’?
What is the AE of ‘mind’?
The actual experience of “surprise” is the sound when then word is (sub)vocalised.
The actual experience of “mind” is the sound when the word is (sub)vocalised.
They are both words and the words are both labels.
The content is what I tend to get caught up in. And when believed, there is a me.
This sentence assumes that there are to ‘me’-s. 

- The one that tends to get caught up in thoughts
- And the another one that is created by other caught up in thoughts
So how many me-s do you have? :)
I meant to point to one and the same “me” in that quote. Your second one. The one that is the illusion. So in fact there are zero me’s. Another way of looking at it is to say I have uncountable me-s. Ha ha.
What is it exactly that is being caught up in thoughts?
It is exactly nothing. There is no me to get caught up in anything. It only seems that way. The pitfall of the illusion.
What does the word ‘I’ in that sentence “I tend to get caught up” points to?
The ‘I’ points to the illusion that there is a “something” behind the actual experience. Which of course doen’t exist in reality. ‘To get caught up’ points to the habitual pattern.
So what is the AE of ‘decision’?
What is the AE of ‘choice’?
Like before: decision an choice are labels. Also words that appear as thoughtcontent and are than subvocalised. So the AE is sound.
 Observe this during the day, and let me know what you find.
Continuing from yesterday.
Clear seeing happened.
I noticed that proliferation is following on a thought. The thoughtcontent is than subvocalised. What it is about, the proliferation, is seemingly connected to the thought preceiding it, but actually, this proliferation is all the time fed by new thoughts arising.
When there is a tactile feeling or soundsensation, I noticed that the thoughts popping up (and proliferation happening) are most of the time, but not always, about those tactile or hearing sensations. That is why they seem connected. But in fact they are seperate events. I also noticed that when first noticing sound, or tactile sensation, there was just sound or tactile sensation happening, shortly after followed by a thought “sensation happening” and another thought “happening at such or so location”, which is labeling happening, not actual experience.
The same when I am at work in the office. The content of the thoughts that pop up seems to be connected to other sensations and thoughtcontents happening. That what is available, is experienced.
(I now notice, while typing these words, that I find it difficult to exactly formulate what was noticed during my seeingsession.)
So there seems to be a connection between the different sense-experiences available at a certain time. But in fact there isn’t, apart from the fact that that is what is experienced is derived from what is available in reality. So when I am at work, most other sense-experiences that are there, are derived from the surroundings I’m in, which have to do with work. That is why most thoughts happening there are about work. But there are also other mental activities available, like the thought popping up that I want to follow this inquiry.
At one point I noticed a thoughtcontent happening (very big) that there is something directing this. Isn’t that interesting? Distraction at work, right in front of my nose.
Suffice it to say that I did recognise it was a thoughtcontent.

Bella


Return to “ARCHIVES”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests