At the front door, waiting for you

[1llusion]

Are there two clear seperate parts to the sensation of 'feeling', what is being felt, and what is doing it?

No there is no separation.

Is the body actively performing a function of 'feeling'?

I don't know.

Is the hand 'doing' the feeling?

I don't know.

Or is there just 'feeling'? A sensation?

Yes, that's all that can be said.

What is your opinion of the sentence 'I feel the computer screen', in light of what you are finding so far?

We have established that there is no "I" doing or feeling, so it should be more correctly described as "There is a sensation when the screen is touched".

[Xain]

Do 'you' feel the screen when it is touched?

Xain ♥

[1llusion]

No, but it is felt.

[Xain]

Well, there was a sensation.
Can we say that all there was, was a sensation?
If you say 'it was felt', then it would suggest there was something that was feeling it.

Examine the experience once more. Just the experience alone - And maybe this time consider how the mind may be adding things to it, that aren't actually what is found.

In the experience, is there more than just a sensation? Really examine it.
Are there two seperate things, one doing something to another (one item feeling, one item being felt)?

Could it be that it is the mind adding 'it must be being felt' to the experience - Does that seem fair?
The mind says, 'It was felt and there must be something doing it'. Something, meaning something seperate to what was being felt.

Are 'you' feeling anything at all right now (sensory experience).
Or is there just 'feeling'?
If there is a 'you' feeling things right now, what exactly is that?

Is the body actively doing the feeling?
Are you 'the body'?

Xain ♥

[1llusion]

Can we say that all there was, was a sensation?

Yes, I would say that's about as accurate as it gets.

In the experience, is there more than just a sensation? Really examine it.

No, there is not.

Are there two seperate things, one doing something to another (one item feeling, one item being felt)?

No, that is not how it is.

Could it be that it is the mind adding 'it must be being felt' to the experience - Does that seem fair?

Yes, that is how it happens.

Or is there just 'feeling'?

Yes.

Is the body actively doing the feeling?

This cannot be determined.

Are you 'the body'?

No.

[1llusion]

Still here.

[1llusion]

I am still around, hope you @Xian are, too.

However, I might have some trouble replying in the next few days due to traveling. But we will see.

[Xain]

Hi Benedikt

Sorry for the delay - Caused by work commitments.
Let's get back on track.

So can it be seen that in all the areas we have examined in relation to the senses, they all seem to 'just operate'.
There isn't an 'I', a seperate self operating them or that the senses are reporting to an 'I' or a seperate self.
The only 'I' to be found is in thought - An IDEA of what is happening.

'I see', 'I hear' - There is seeing, there is hearing, but this 'I' that is doing it can't be located.
It's just a thought - An idea of what is happening.

This is a very important examination. Really consider this if you have no done so already.
In these examinations, the only 'I', seperate self that can be discovered is in thought.

Ok, now let's bounce back a little and examine your answers to see if we can probe a little deeper.

Sink into the surrender for a bit.

Yes, this is precisely what I should do. But: how? Just sit somewhere quietly? Keep the mantra "you don't exist" spinning in my head?

Ok, let's look at this area.

Just before going in, let me address 'You don't exist' to try to clear up any confusion.
Clearly something is 'here'. Something exists.
Could something that doesn't exist make the claim 'I don't exist'?
What I want you to investigate is 'what you exist as'.
We have an idea, a belief that we exist as a seperate self, an 'I', usually a body with a mind.
We are examining if this is really true or not. Could it be that all references to 'I', this seperate self that we believe ourselves to be, to be just a thought? An idea.

Let's press on.
Again, try not to go to thoughts but examine experience here and now in order to answer the questions.

What 'I' can you find right here and now that could 'sink into surrender'.
What does this 'I' in the statement look like? How does it appear? What can be found?

In relation to 'running a mantra' what 'I' is going to do this?
What 'I' can choose to have a mantra running or not?
Can this 'I' that is being referred to here be found in any of the senses?

Xain ♥

[1llusion]

What 'I' can you find right here and now that could 'sink into surrender'.

The idea is more that whatever is generating all the sensations and thoughts switches into "surrender" through external stimulus.

What does this 'I' in the statement look like? How does it appear? What can be found?

It can't be found; it was more meant as a description of the system that is responsible for generating all the sensations (see above).

In relation to 'running a mantra' what 'I' is going to do this?

See above.

What 'I' can choose to have a mantra running or not?

As implied above, there is no entity choosing just the possibility for this or something else to happen based on some stimulus.

Can this 'I' that is being referred to here be found in any of the senses?

No, it can't.

[Xain]

Let's approach this backwards :-)

What 'I' can choose to have a mantra running or not?

As implied above, there is no entity choosing just the possibility for this or something else to happen based on some stimulus.

Can this 'I' that is being referred to here be found in any of the senses?

No, it can't.

Good. Is is realised that in these statements, the 'I' is just an idea - A thought?
What is being referred to is not an actual existing 'thing' that can be found.
Consider it . . .

The idea is more that whatever is generating all the sensations and thoughts switches into "surrender" through external stimulus

Ok, this looks like two further interesting areas to examine.

Let's open it up with some general questions.

Do you believe there is a 'you' generating the sensations?
Is there a 'you' receiving the sensations?

In relation to thoughts:
Is there a 'you' generating the thoughts?
Is there a 'you' receiving the thoughts?
Are the thoughts appearing 'yours'?

Xain ♥

[1llusion]

Good. Is is realised that in these statements, the 'I' is just an idea - A thought?

Yes.

Do you believe there is a 'you' generating the sensations?

No, but there is a "something".

Is there a 'you' receiving the sensations?

I think that was what I believed just recently, but there is nothing that indicates it other than thought.

Is there a 'you' generating the thoughts?

No, but a "something".

Is there a 'you' receiving the thoughts?

No "me" can be found, so: No.

Are the thoughts appearing 'yours'?

There is nothing indicating an owner, however, they seem to be unique to the experience form which I am writing.

[Xain]

Do you believe there is a 'you' generating the sensations?

No, but there is a "something".

Well let's look at this very closely.
Sensations appear - That is without question.
Rather than assuming that there must be something creating them (which is quite a fair assumption), can you say that with certainty that it is not something that can be found (using the senses)?
Can you say that you can only ever have an IDEA about that it might be - A thought?
One of those thoughts being 'I'?

Is there a 'you' generating the thoughts?
No, but a "something"

Well let's look deeper at thoughts now, just like we did about the sensations - In exactly the same way.

Can a seperate self, an 'I' be found that has the thoughts?
Can you find one - A 'thing' that these thoughts appear to?

Do you have any control over thoughts whatsoever?
Do you know what the next thought will be?
Could you control your thoughts so that you only have nice thoughts all week?

If it is said 'I think', what is the 'I' that is doing the thinking?
Could the 'I' in this statement, just be a thought?

There is nothing indicating an owner, however, they seem to be unique to the experience form which I am writing.

That's interesting.
If there a 'you' here right now that is having a unique experience?
Actually examine this moment using all the senses and try to locate this 'you' - Is there one?
Can one be found? Or is there just the current experience?

If it is said 'I am experiencing', what exactly is this 'I'?
Is it anything more than just a thought?

Xain ♥

[1llusion]

Rather than assuming that there must be something creating them (which is quite a fair assumption), can you say that with certainty that it is not something that can be found (using the senses)?

Yes, I can say that.

Can you say that you can only ever have an IDEA about that it might be - A thought?

Yes.

One of those thoughts being 'I'?

I don't know; possibly I am playing words by substituting "I" by "something".

Can a seperate self, an 'I' be found that has the thoughts?

No, it can only be imagined.

Can you find one - A 'thing' that these thoughts appear to?

No.

Do you have any control over thoughts whatsoever?

No.

Do you know what the next thought will be?

No.

Could you control your thoughts so that you only have nice thoughts all week?

No.

If it is said 'I think', what is the 'I' that is doing the thinking?

It is just a convention to put it like that.

Could the 'I' in this statement, just be a thought?

Yes.

Is there a 'you' here right now that is having a unique experience?

It seems I am playing the same game as above: The idea is that all sensations and thoughts are somehow tied together and available to the perspective from which this writing happens. It is to establish a point of reference for the purpose of this communication.

Actually examine this moment using all the senses and try to locate this 'you' - Is there one?

No.

Can one be found? Or is there just the current experience?

That is all there is, the fleeting experience.

If it is said 'I am experiencing', what exactly is this 'I'?

It is an assumption based on the idea that there must be something that can be referenced.

Is it anything more than just a thought?

No.

[Xain]

If it is said 'I am experiencing', what exactly is this 'I'?
It is an assumption based on the idea that there must be something that can be referenced.

Excellent. Yes.
So this 'I' is simply a thought - An idea - An assumption.
Has it been an assumption all along?

One of those thoughts being 'I'?
I don't know; possibly I am playing words by substituting "I" by "something".

Is there 'something'? If there is, what is that? Can you find it?
If all you can find are thoughts, an 'idea' about what it is, then 'something' was not found - It was assumed.
Or more specifically, all that was found was a thought.

Probing into 'thoughts' deeper . . .

Has any thought that has ever appeared in experience, appeared to 'you'?
Or has it 'just appeared'?

Has any thought ever been created or controlled by 'you' in any way?

Could you ever stop or control thoughts in any way?

The idea is that all sensations and thoughts are somehow tied together and available to the perspective from which this writing happens

It's a perfectly valid idea.
But is it any more than that?
What exactly is 'this perspective from which writing happens'?
Is there a 'you' doing the writing?
Is there a 'you' viewing from a perspective?

Write something right now. Actually do it.
What is doing it? What is the 'I' in the phrase 'I am writing'?
What is choosing the words? What is controlling the hands?

Xain ♥

[1llusion]

Has it been an assumption all along?

Yes.

Is there 'something'? If there is, what is that? Can you find it?

No, that's it: Nothing can ever be found.

Has any thought that has ever appeared in experience, appeared to 'you'?

No, that was just an assumption.

Or has it 'just appeared'?

Yes, that is the most accurate description.

Has any thought ever been created or controlled by 'you' in any way?

No. Again, this was just an unquestioned assumption.

Could you ever stop or control thoughts in any way?

No.

But is it any more than that?

It cannot be validated from current experience; in fact, it seems now that the nature of current experience is indescribable in the sense of: "an unknown something is doing we don't know what" (quoted from some ZEN book).

What exactly is 'this perspective from which writing happens'?

It is a helpless attempt to describe what cannot be known in direct experience.

Is there a 'you' doing the writing?

No, there is nothing that indicates it.

Is there a 'you' viewing from a perspective?

As said above, this is nothing more than an idea which I hold quite dear in order to relate to anything of experience.

What is doing it? What is the 'I' in the phrase 'I am writing'? What is choosing the words? What is controlling the hands?

Nothing is doing it.