I don't know

[nado]

Hello Petrus!

Dont ask me. Look for yourself!

I'll try my best. I found the "What does it take to SEE?" video under Resources / Videos, but what is meant by "looking" is still not 100% clear to me.

You think there is a world and you are in it.
If you look you see the world (experience) is in you.
Without you no world (and with you I dont mean the separate Nado in this post).
Can you see this?

I still feel I'm part of the world, but I'm considering the inverse. Today I was comparing my body to my car: just driving it, can't see its "face" while doing so.

"an experiencer that is not perceived"?
How could there be suc a thing? Tell me.

If for example the universe had an all-encompassing "soul" and every physical object was just a puppet that soul was plugging its billions of touch, sight, sound, etc. sensors into. I'm not saying I believe this, but as all I come up with when I ask "what am I?", "what is the universe?", etc. is "I don't know", I have to consider it as a possibility.

Cheers,
Nado

[Petrus]

Hi Nado,

I'll try my best.

Is there an I somewhere that can try? Where does it reside? How big is it?

what is meant by "looking" is still not 100% clear to me.

Looking is: not mixing up thoughts/memories/imaginations with truth.

I still feel I'm part of the world

Close your eyes. Where is the world?

If for example the universe had .....

That is thinking/imagining. That is not looking. Isnt that true?

all I come up with when I ask "what am I?", "what is the universe?", etc. is "I don't know"

So after the question you experience the thought "I dont know".
Is that seeing the truth? Or is it just experiencing a thought?

Regards, Petrus

[nado]

Hello Petrus!

Is there an I somewhere that can try? Where does it reside? How big is it?

I can't find an "I", but I still identify with one.

I asked myself what I identify with the most and I think it would have to be "I am a software engineer". Would it be helpful to try to unlearn that or would it just be a distraction? I find thinking "I don't exist" is funny, but thinking of unlearning "I am a software engineer" makes me uncomfortable, but I'm ready to dive in if it's the way to go.

Looking is: not mixing up thoughts/memories/imaginations with truth.

So is "looking" focusing on raw experiences before being interpreted by the mind/brain?

If so, when I'm looking should I answer what is seen right away or should I sit on it for a while?

Close your eyes. Where is the world?

With my current beliefs I feel like I'm in the world and when I close my eyes I still feel that way.

When I "look inside", besides my senses and thoughts there is "that thing" that is always there and that I enjoy focusing on. "That thing" I cannot say is part of the world because it doesn't have a location or size. But I also don't see that the world comes from "that thing".

If for example the universe had .....

That is thinking/imagining. That is not looking. Isnt that true?

True.

So after the question you experience the thought "I dont know".
Is that seeing the truth? Or is it just experiencing a thought?

Oh, it's just a thought!

Cheers,
Nado

[Petrus]

Hi Nado,

I can't find an "I", but I still identify with one.

If you cant find an I, then who is identifying?

I find thinking "I don't exist" is funny, but thinking of unlearning "I am a software engineer" makes me uncomfortable, but I'm ready to dive in if it's the way to go.

It doesnt matter with what you say you are identifying. Just look and see it is not possible! There is no one to identify.
The strange thing is you state you cannot find an I, so who is doing this identifying?
It is all thoughts about thoughts about thoughts. Can you see this?

...before being interpreted by the mind/brain?

What brain? This is knowledge/memory/thought.

... or should I sit on it for a while?

If sitting on it means thinking about it, then stop it!

If so, when I'm looking should I answer what is seen right away

haha, for who you are doing this investigation?

With my current beliefs I feel like I'm in the world and when I close my eyes I still feel that way.

Exactly, so your world is constructed with beliefs, what you see is what you think/belief. Drop all your beliefs.
What is left after that?

When I "look inside", besides my senses and thoughts there is "that thing" that is always there and that I enjoy focusing on

Look again, it is no-thing!

But I also don't see that the world comes from "that thing".

It is impossible to see that. There is no-thing.
There is experience without experiencer. Period.

You are still giving me your thoughts about these matters.
I ask you to stop that.
Look and tell what you see, not what you think/remember/imaginate!
So, I am not interested in the contents of your thoughts.
Just tell me what you see.

Regards, Petrus

[Petrus]

So, I am not interested in the contents of your thoughts.

The contents of your thoughts are your imaginated watermelons. They are not real.
What you see is real, what you imaginate is fiction. What is difficult about this to understand?

[nado]

Hello Petrus!

I can't find an "I", but I still identify with one.

If you cant find an I, then who is identifying?
It doesnt matter with what you say you are identifying. Just look and see it is not possible! There is no one to identify.
The strange thing is you state you cannot find an I, so who is doing this identifying?
It is all thoughts about thoughts about thoughts. Can you see this?

I just had an inspiration: there is a body and there is a mind, but they are unrelated. Going around and saying "me, me, me" is what the mind does. If branches were seen where arms are seen now and a trunk was seen where legs are seen now, the exact same mind I'm observing right now would say "I'm a tree".

So the mind is doing the identifying, but the body's not me and the mind's not me and there doesn't need to be an "I" for either one to exist. It feels correct right now, I'll have to do some more looking to let it sink in or bounce back!

when I'm looking should I answer what is seen right away or should I sit on it for a while?

If sitting on it means thinking about it, then stop it!

I meant more like meditation, sitting down quietly ignoring thoughts and wait for an answer to appear without coming from the mind analyzing things.

If so, when I'm looking should I answer what is seen right away

haha, for who you are doing this investigation?

The investigation is being done not for me, not for myself and not for I! :)

The looking is being done by myself to liberate myself. When wondering about things there is sometimes an immediate answer and a more accurate or contradicting one that comes later. I don't know why or where those answers are from, but it's the "delayed" one we're after, so sit on it.

You think there is a world and you are in it.
If you look you see the world (experience) is in you.
Close your eyes. Where is the world?

With my current beliefs I feel like I'm in the world and when I close my eyes I still feel that way.

Exactly, so your world is constructed with beliefs, what you see is what you think/belief. Drop all your beliefs.
What is left after that?

Just wanna make sure we have the same definition of world... I understand "world" to mean the physical space where the body moves around (e.g. the city, the planet, etc.). Are we saying if looked correctly the world and body are seen to be illusions?

When I "look inside", besides my senses and thoughts there is "that thing" that is always there and that I enjoy focusing on

Look again, it is no-thing!

What's the best word for it? If we all experience it there must be attempts to talk or write about it...

But I also don't see that the world comes from "that thing".

It is impossible to see that. There is no-thing.
There is experience without experiencer. Period.

The experience without an experiencer I think I'm starting to see now, along with the mind just calling anything "me".

You are still giving me your thoughts about these matters.
I ask you to stop that.
Look and tell what you see, not what you think/remember/imaginate!
So, I am not interested in the contents of your thoughts.
Just tell me what you see.

The contents of your thoughts are your imaginated watermelons. They are not real.
What you see is real, what you imaginate is fiction. What is difficult about this to understand?

I understand that anything outside of direct experience is not real but I'm not "seeing" it. Without first-hand experience of it as a truth wouldn't I need to accept it as a belief? I'm stuck, could we troubleshoot where?

Cheers,
Nado

[Petrus]

Hi Nado,

I understand that anything outside of direct experience is not real

There is no outside direct experience.

I'm stuck, could we troubleshoot where?

The only thing I see you do is chasing imagened watermelons and your mind going crazy.
If you remove all the watermelons, what is left?

I don't know why or where those answers are from, but it's the "delayed" one we're after, so sit on it.

"we"? Oh no, are there more of you? I am after nothing by the way...

"that thing" that is always there

What's the best word for it? If we all experience it....

You cant experience it. There are no words for it. It is what you (really) are.


Exercise. From now on please dont use the word "I" anymore in your answers.
If you do so, how does that feel?

Regards, Petrus

[nado]

Hello Petrus!

If you remove all the watermelons, what is left?

Without imagination "the world" is just an abstraction; people and streets can be seen, but "the world" itself cannot be experienced.

Without imagination there is only perceptions through the 5 senses, aliveness and breathing.

Exercise. From now on please dont use the word "I" anymore in your answers.
If you do so, how does that feel?

It feels robotic, like a scientist writing a report.

Thanks!

Cheers,
Nado

[nado]

Without imagination there is only perceptions through the 5 senses, aliveness and breathing.

...and thoughts that can be ignored but keep coming anyways.

[Petrus]

Hi Nado,

the world" itself cannot be experienced.

Now we're talking!

Now remove the streets and the cars, remove everything. What is left?

Something that can not be experienced, can it exist?
How could you possibly know if something exist, if you cant experience it?

like a scientist writing a report.

Great, thats the spirit!!! That is looking!

Warm regards, Petrus

[nado]

Hi Petrus!

Now remove the streets and the cars, remove everything. What is left?

Cars, streets and all other physical objects are also conceptual aggregates that can be decomposed recursively, all the way to atoms that cannot be experienced, therefore there is nothing left.

Something that can not be experienced, can it exist?

No.

How could you possibly know if something exist, if you cant experience it?

Without directly experiencing something, it cannot be known to exist with certainty. That means: does not exist or keep looking!

like a scientist writing a report.

Great, thats the spirit!!! That is looking!

Good, there is now an extremely clear understanding of what "looking" means.

Cheers,
Nado

[Petrus]

Hi Nado,

That means: does not exist or keep looking!

You miss the point here.
The one that keeps looking is the one trying to eat your imagined watermelon.
Only a real watermelon can be eaten.

Even if you find a lost key, you only can believe all the time it was somewhere. But in fact you dont know: you believe it, but you dont know!

With the "I", it is much more simple: no-one ever can say he saw or experienced an I somewhere.
So, you can keep looking, or just stay believing SantaClaus does exist.
Can you see believing in an I is the same as believing in SantaClaus: it is a belief!
If you see that, I dont mind you keep looking haha.

Regards, Petrus

[nado]

Hello Petrus!

That means: does not exist or keep looking!

You miss the point here.
The one that keeps looking is the one trying to eat your imagined watermelon.
Only a real watermelon can be eaten.

Even if you find a lost key, you only can believe all the time it was somewhere. But in fact you dont know: you believe it, but you dont know!

With the "I", it is much more simple: no-one ever can say he saw or experienced an I somewhere.
So, you can keep looking, or just stay believing SantaClaus does exist.
Can you see believing in an I is the same as believing in SantaClaus: it is a belief!
If you see that, I dont mind you keep looking haha.

It is the mind's model of reality that says a key cannot just appear, that it must have been created by someone and carried around until it was lost.

Looking for "Nado" in direct experience is silly as it is only a concept like "the world". Looking for "I" is even sillier as it is only a conceptual pointer to another concept such as "Nado".

Cheers,
Nado

[Petrus]

Ok Nado, All set then?
Everything clear now? No more searching?

Regards, Petrus

[nado]

Hello Petrus!

Ok Nado, All set then?
Everything clear now? No more searching?

This realization is 100% intellectual for me and I was expecting something that cannot be explained through words, so I went back to the web site to see if my expectations were wrong and found this:

Code: Select all

Once this is truly seen, not just accepted as a theoretical possibility but actually seen to be the case

This is where we are.

I really like the lost key example, I had never considered such a thing before, but if I happened to walk by a lost key today I would only think of it "just appearing" as a funny story, not as the truth.

Are you able to help me see this to be the case or is it beyond the scope of what Liberation Unleashed does?

Cheers,
Nado