Hoping to start a dialogue.

[bowlington]

Vivien,

This one is kind of a mess. I'm sorry if it comes out too jumbled to be useful.

No. Sensation is as it is, and as far as I can tell, has nothing to do with any kind of word or words, or thoughts, or descriptions of any kind.

Good observations.

Thank you but, I'm going on what I've seen only a handful of times. Most times these ideas are so strange as to seem to not be possible. I know it's a process, and it takes time. But mind absolutely resists this idea. I have seen that direct experience is direct experience, indescribable and without qualities, and that thoughts are thoughts which have no reality of their own, and that the two together seem to make up the perception of reality. But in the middle of my day this idea seems impossible.

What would you be without the story “life is suffering”?
Would 'you' be?

I don't know. I'm not sure how to imagine an answer.

You said the I can still arise even with positive thoughts. Plus people still exist after being liberated, so I mean, I suppose so, in some form?

Seeming ‘problem’ arise because there is a desire not to have those beliefs.

I mean, I've seen them, I know they're there. I know they are going to be or have been hindrances. But what I meant was that I don't actually want to try to get rid of them. I can't bring myself to even want to.

Rather focus on the exercises.
I’ll wait for your response to the ‘body-mirror-past’ exercise.

You're going to be disappointed I fear.

Do you believe that ‘you’ are not through?
Is there a 'you' that started this investigation?
Has there ever been a 'you' doing anything?

When you ask these questions I remember seeing how "I" arises as thought, and couldn't be found anywhere but as a thought. So the answer is that "I" could never be through, nor could "I" ever investigate. Still it does appear to be happening. And it doesn't appear to be over. The automatic assumed belief that "I" is self or that "I" exists as more than thought, or exists independently still occurs.

Was the ‘body’ that is seen in the mirror the one that was born on a certain date?

I mean, yeah. It has never occurred to me to think of it as otherwise. Even if it's just perception, it's a continuous perception that is stable enough to be called persistent over the course of years... isn't it?

So what you're saying is that it's the thoughts about "body" that are the only place that body can be found. Because the direct experience is without qualities. And the content of thought has no reality. So body only exists in thought. And the content of thought is never real. This is so strange.

Or is the ‘body’ that is being seen in the mirror, different to the ‘body’ that was born on a certain date?

I guess it's different because what's arising is different. So the direct experience is demonstrably different. Which means it is different. Thoughts link them together, but thoughts can't describe reality. And any "body" can only be found in thoughts anyway, same or different... so there is no body? Am I getting this right?

Other than this thought, how else is it known that the ‘body’ was born on that specific date?

No way that I can tell other than thoughts.

However, all it is just a thought appearing that is believed in?
Can you see this?

Momentarily. It goes as fast as it comes. And this is intensely weird.

Can you see that “This body was born on xxxx” is simply a thought appearing that is believed in?
And nothing more than that.

Yes. Just as happiness or suffering can't be descriptions of what is experienced directly, neither can the thoughts about when the body was born, or of a body itself.

So, can this body have a past?

No. The body in direct experience changes all the time, I think. I have to spend more time with it to be sure. But then past and future of the body only exist in thoughts about the body.

Can time be experienced?

I don't know. I think I lost it.


I have a question. If I had been liberated at some point in the past, would everything between then and now have happened exactly the same as the way it happened in actuality as a non-liberated person? The only difference being the nature of how it is perceived?

Is it true that there are thoughts that occur, and there are colors that appear, and there are sensations that occur, and so on, and that all occur simultaneously, but all are parts that are independent of one another and don't actually relate? Why when I look at this but I'm not particularly resistant or invested in the idea of a self does a self seem to exist that overlays all these parts and makes them appear to be related when they are not? Seeing the components as just parts that occur simultaneously and that they have no actual relation to each other and are not a cohesive self feels like trying to pry apart things that are superglued together. If things exist as I've described, or some approximation of what I've described, then why is there such tremendous difficulty in seeing it. I mean, for the merest of moments have I been able to glimpse this. And then I tend to want to dismiss it because it's so hard to perceive, that it seems like it must be false. It shouldn't take effort to do, right?

Also, do you think that one person's liberation is the same as another person's? Is there only one kind of liberation?

[Vivien]

Dear Brian,

I have seen that direct experience is direct experience, indescribable and without qualities, and that thoughts are thoughts which have no reality of their own, and that the two together seem to make up the perception of reality. But in the middle of my day this idea seems impossible.

Here is a big, fat expectation! There is an expectation that this should be a constant state. But it shouldn’t!

As I already mentioned, liberation is not a state. All states come and go. Liberation is seeing that there has never been a self. However, being lost in stories happen, but every time it is checked, it is seen that ‘I’ is just a thought. That’s all, nothing more. You’re expecting something big, fantastic things to happen. It won’t. Liberation is nothing special.

Liberation is not about constant peace and happiness and no more so called ‘negative’ emotions ever. It is about seeing (when it is checked) that the ‘me’ is just a thought.

Vivien: What would you be without the story “life is suffering”?
Would 'you' be?

Brian: I don't know. I'm not sure how to imagine an answer.
You said the I can still arise even with positive thoughts.

The ‘I’ not just can still arise, but the ‘I’ definitely arise a lot of times a day. There is nothing wrong with it. Without an ‘I’ how would we communicate?

The question “Would ‘you’ be?” – refers to the separate entity that ‘lives’ in the story. Without believing the story “life is suffering”, the pull back to identification with the I-thought would lessen. Since, there is an identification with the belief “life is suffering”, it means that “I suffer”! – “I am the one that experiences life as suffering”.

So there is a clinging to this belief “life is suffering” because here it is a core, basic belief about ‘me and my life’, and the whole identity of ‘me’ is invested in this belief. If it would turn out that life is not equals to suffering then the ‘my’ identity would start to ‘collapse’ and the traces of the belief in ‘me’ would seen through.

Plus people still exist after being liberated, so I mean, I suppose so, in some form?

Here is a misunderstanding.

The BODY exist before and after ‘liberation’.
However, there has never been a ‘you’ or ‘me’ neither before nor after ‘liberation’.

With the so called ‘liberation’ nothing changes. The body is the same, and the illusion of the ‘me’ is also the same. Only the perception changes. ONLY the BELIEF in the separate self evaporates. Everything else is the same. The illusion of the self WON’T go away. The only difference is that it is seen only as an illusion, but it won’t stop occurring.

But what I meant was that I don't actually want to try to get rid of them. I can't bring myself to even want to.

What is this ‘I’ that don’t want to get rid of them?
Where is this ‘I’ exactly?
What is the ‘I’ that cannot bring ‘itself’ even to wanting?
How this ‘I’ actually experienced?

When you ask these questions I remember seeing how "I" arises as thought, and couldn't be found anywhere but as a thought. So the answer is that "I" could never be through, nor could "I" ever investigate. Still it does appear to be happening. And it doesn't appear to be over. The automatic assumed belief that "I" is self or that "I" exists as more than thought, or exists independently still occurs.

This is the same expectation I described above. It still occurs here (to Vivien)! And it occurs to ALL the so called ‘liberated humans’ I know. The illusion will not go away. It is useful to have. The only difference the seeing that this is just an illusion and not an actual reality.

Vivien: Was the ‘body’ that is seen in the mirror the one that was born on a certain date?

Brian: So what you're saying is that it's the thoughts about "body" that are the only place that body can be found. Because the direct experience is without qualities. And the content of thought has no reality. So body only exists in thought. And the content of thought is never real. This is so strange.

My intention with this question was to question the notion of time and past.

For the body, I would rather say that the body is mentally constructed. It is assembled from different sensory perceptions, like seeing, touching, feeling, hearing. But in our everyday life, we experience the body a real thing. But when it is examined closely, it turns out that it is a conglomeration of different sensory perceptions. So the body is not what we think it is.

Vivien: Can time be experienced?

Brian: I don't know. I think I lost it.

How time is experienced with the 5 senses?
Does past or future ‘exists’ other than content of thoughts?
Is there any proof whatsoever that the past has ever happened?
Is there a proof that you had dinner last night?

I have a question. If I had been liberated at some point in the past, would everything between then and now have happened exactly the same as the way it happened in actuality as a non-liberated person? The only difference being the nature of how it is perceived?

YES! Everything remains the same, nothing changes, ONLY the PERCEPTION changes (meaning, seeing that the ‘I’ is just an illusion, a mirage, but the illusion won’t go away!)

If things exist as I've described, or some approximation of what I've described, then why is there such tremendous difficulty in seeing it.

(1) Because of the unrealistic expectation (see above)
(2) Not seeing is a strong conditioning

I mean, for the merest of moments have I been able to glimpse this. And then I tend to want to dismiss it because it's so hard to perceive, that it seems like it must be false. It shouldn't take effort to do, right?

Here is another hidden expectation that in liberation there is no effort. But the presence or absent of effort has nothing to do with liberation.

The emphasis is not whether effort is necessary or not (it doesn’t matter), but rather what is making the effort?
Is there a ‘thing’ that is doing the effort-ing, or effort-ing just happening?

Also, do you think that one person's liberation is the same as another person's? Is there only one kind of liberation?

No, there aren’t two same ‘liberation’. There is a same diversity before and after liberation (due to conditionings).

But what is liberation anyway? ‘Liberation’ is just another concept. If we want to give a simple definition to it, then ‘liberation’ is seeing that there has never been a ‘me’ that could govern or control life or anything. No more. Anything else is just further expectation (fantasies).

Love, Vivien

[bowlington]

So there is a clinging to this belief “life is suffering” because here it is a core, basic belief about ‘me and my life’, and the whole identity of ‘me’ is invested in this belief.

I understand that when it is examined the suffering ceases to be suffering. You have said that it actually isn't suffering, but can't it be said that the delusion of belief in a separate self is suffering? So the seeing undoes the delusion, which reveals the true nature of reality, which as it turns out is not suffering. But the unliberated hold the unexamined belief in an inherent self, and so couldn't it be said that existing in that state is suffering?

If it would turn out that life is not equals to suffering then the ‘my’ identity would start to ‘collapse’ and the traces of the belief in ‘me’ would seen through.

This isn't what holds me back. I am all for this. I could set down both the suffering and the one who suffers right now. My baggage is related to helping others. And it's not that I can't let it go because it would undo the story of "me", it's that I can't undo "me" because it would undo helping others.

What is this ‘I’ that don’t want to get rid of them?
Where is this ‘I’ exactly?

As thoughts only. Which have no ability to do anything but be experienced as thoughts. Which means "I" can't do that thing anyway. So does that mean I don't have to worry about it?

How time is experienced with the 5 senses?
Does past or future ‘exists’ other than content of thoughts?
Is there any proof whatsoever that the past has ever happened?
Is there a proof that you had dinner last night?

Well, I may have gained a couple of pounds. But other than that, only as thoughts. The trouble is that I sort of know the answer without having to look anymore, so I guess there's a danger in just saying it without knowing it.

I have a question. If I had been liberated at some point in the past, would everything between then and now have happened exactly the same as the way it happened in actuality as a non-liberated person? The only difference being the nature of how it is perceived?

YES! Everything remains the same, nothing changes, ONLY the PERCEPTION changes (meaning, seeing that the ‘I’ is just an illusion, a mirage, but the illusion won’t go away!)

I was thinking all day today that then this life is a lot like a prison.

But then I just thought about that and the answer to it is that if there's no one to be imprisoned then there's no one to suffer in prison. It's strange how the events of "my" life would go from personal (they're "mine", they happen to "me") to impersonal, and are just things that are happening.

Also, I have had interactions where someone says or does something, the "self" in me arises intensely, anxiety happens, action based on fear and anxiety happens, and then reaction from another is experienced (usually negative). If the belief in the illusion were gone, then anxiety couldn't arise, could it? Then neurotic action couldn't happen, and then the reaction would be different, wouldn't it?


How will you and I know that what we're doing here is finished?

[Vivien]

Dear Brian,

So the seeing undoes the delusion, which reveals the true nature of reality, which as it turns out is not suffering. But the unliberated hold the unexamined belief in an inherent self, and so couldn't it be said that existing in that state is suffering?

Here it is another UNREALISTIC expectation. There is a BELIEF here that after seeing through the illusion of the self, suffering cannot arise again. But this is not the case. Suffering CAN happen after seeing through the self, because SUFFERING IS A HABIT. After ‘practising’ a habit for several years or even a lifetime, it cannot go away in an instance. But, every time the habit is seen through it lessens.

You referred to the difference between an ‘unliberated’ and ‘liberated’ several times. There is no clear dividing line between the two. If there is any line, then it is the seeing that the ‘I’ is only just a thought.

My baggage is related to helping others. And it's not that I can't let it go because it would undo the story of "me", it's that I can't undo "me" because it would undo helping others.

What is the ‘I’ that cannot do the undoing of ‘itself’?

How many ‘I’-s do you have?
(1) the ‘I’ that can’t do the undoing
(2) the ‘me’ that cannot be undone

So is there a BELIEF that if the ‘I’ is seen through than helping others would stop?

Please examine this belief carefully.
You like using the words ‘liberated’ and ‘unliberated’, so I use them here to help you to understand this. There is no ‘I’ whether a human is labelled as ‘liberated’ or ‘unliberated’, neither before, nor after. So, if you equate helping others with being ‘unliberated’, and not helping others with being ‘liberated’, then you totally miss the point. There is no self neither with ‘liberation’ nor with ‘unliberation’. So NOTHING changes! It has nothing to do with helping others.

Look, what am I doing right now with you and several others? What other guides on this forum doing? Isn’t this called helping others? The ‘liberated’ label can be applied on guides. I had never helped as much people before, as I do now.

As thoughts only. Which have no ability to do anything but be experienced as thoughts. Which means "I" can't do that thing anyway. So does that mean I don't have to worry about it?

What is this ‘I’ that could worry or not?
What is this ‘I’ that could make a decision whether to worry or not?

The trouble is that I sort of know the answer without having to look anymore, so I guess there's a danger in just saying it without knowing it.

Brian, don’t guess, LOOK!

I was thinking all day today that then this life is a lot like a prison.

Please go through these questions, and answer them one-by-one. Don’t miss any. Don’t just think about them, don’t guess, but LOOK.

What is this ‘I’ that doing the thinking?
How this ‘I’ does the thinking?
Where is the 'I' that controls thoughts?
Where is the 'I' that has ownership of thoughts?
What do the thoughts belong to? What owns them?

Do you think thoughts or do thoughts think you?
Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Including the thought 'I'?

But then I just thought about that and the answer to it is that if there's no one to be imprisoned then there's no one to suffer in prison. It's strange how the events of "my" life would go from personal (they're "mine", they happen to "me") to impersonal, and are just things that are happening.

Good observations.

and then reaction from another is experienced

OK, let’s examine ‘others’.
Here is a little exercise. Next time when you talk to someone you can observe this:

There is a sound (voice of the other) and a sight that is labelled as the 'other body'. But, is there any link between the sound and the sight, meaning that the sound is coming from that sight (the other) or only thoughts and mental constructs link them?

What are others in direct experience?
How others are experienced?
Are there others independently from ‘my’ interpretation?

I

f the belief in the illusion were gone, then anxiety couldn't arise, could it? Then neurotic action couldn't happen, and then the reaction would be different, wouldn't it?

Misconception #1: “If the belief in the illusion were gone”
As I wrote to you in my previous post, the illusion won’t disappear! It is only seen as illusion, but it will still arise!

Misconception #2: “anxiety couldn’t arise”
When anxiety conditioned, then it will happen even after seeing no-self, because anxiety is a conditioned habit. (It may lessen, but it still can arise)

Misconception #3: “the neurotic action couldn’t happen”
When neurotic action conditioned, then it will happen even after seeing no-self, because neurotic action is a conditioned habit.

How will you and I know that what we're doing here is finished?

It doesn’t matter what I think and how I interpret ‘your’ words written here. What matters is what you believe.

I don’t know how else could I state it more clearly:

Liberation means that it is seen that there has never been a ‘you’ that could govern or control anything. It is seen that ‘I’ is just a thought with NO choice or free will.

It seems to me that you ignore my replies to could help dispel the unrealistic expectations. I’m not saying that you are doing it intentionally, but in order to keep the belief that “that liberation cannot happen to me” all the possible pointers (and evidences) are missed.

So, I’d like to read through again our WHOLE conversation from the beginning (you can re-read it more than once). You might be surprised what you can find…

Take your time with the questions. Don’t guess, LOOK!

Love, Vivien

[bowlington]

Vivien,

I will do this. Please give me a bit more time.

Brian

[Vivien]

All right Brian, take your time :)

Love, Vivien

[Vivien]

How things are going?

Love, Vivien

[bowlington]

Hi Vivien,

I haven't finished the thread yet, I'm still on page two at the moment. I'll have to read more and write more tomorrow.

This last week or so I've thought a lot about everything you've discussed with me about the notion of a lack of a self. It seems quite clear at times. These are just happening, and there are "self" thoughts which are the only place that a self actually exists, which are believed to be true, and which make the whole world into self and other, or mine and not-mine. Somewhere in there is suffering. I don't know how to describe it sufficiently to demonstrate that I have seen it, but I have seen it. Or rather it has been seen. I understand that these thoughts arise on their own, and that they aren't under anyone's conscious control, and that the only link in the chain that breaks is the unquestioned belief that thoughts are telling the truth. It occurs to me at times like these that if a state of peace, or anything like it, exists, then there must be an end to suffering or the sufferer. It seems to me that everyone, myself included, believes suffering to exist externally, and so the desire is always to change what is external to achieve peace for themselves. And I've been doing that my whole life... trying to end suffering by ending the things that were thought of as suffering. But the other way, and apparently the only real way, is to put and end to the sufferer, which never seems to occur to anyone. The things that were thought of as being suffering still occur just the same as before, but they aren't happening to anyone, so they cease to be suffering. It just seems amazing... you don't end the suffering, you end the sufferer (which is only possible because it doesn't exist in the first place). I've been doing it exactly backwards this whole time.

As I read through the first couple of pages of our dialogue it strikes me that I do slide back into thoughts very often. You guide me to a place of seeing, seeing happens, and a return to believing the content of thoughts occurs, followed by all manner of negativity. Also, it seems I've made you repeat yourself quite a bit. There are things you've been saying since the first post that we're still covering. I apologize for that. It must be frustrating. I'm someone who has always been very much in my head, as I'm sure you're aware by now. But I am starting to lose the belief in the truth of the content of thought. In addition to the years of conditioning and being lost in thought to an extraordinary degree, I should point out that you often ask me to observe my thoughts and see something about their nature. Well I tend to hesitate (although I always make sincere effort) because at some point in the past I have actively tried to deny "suffering" thoughts in order to get rid of them, and the result was a disaster. When you say "notice this about thoughts" I try to DO something, rather than simply observe, and the end result can be unpleasant. I also know that that is an opportunity, but sometimes it's hard to say "it hurts, let's do seeing."

When it happens, it happens on its own. So I don't know what to do other than to just sort of relax and let what's going to happen happen.

Again I apologize for the long delay in replying. My schedule permits me less time than it did in September, and I'm not sure I can maintain a pace like that going forward.

Thanks for being patient, and thanks for being here with me through everything so far.

Brian

[Vivien]

Dear Brian,

It seems to me that everyone, myself included, believes suffering to exist externally, and so the desire is always to change what is external to achieve peace for themselves. And I've been doing that my whole life... trying to end suffering by ending the things that were thought of as suffering. But the other way, and apparently the only real way, is to put and end to the sufferer, which never seems to occur to anyone. The things that were thought of as being suffering still occur just the same as before, but they aren't happening to anyone, so they cease to be suffering.

Very good observations. I’m happy for you Brian :)

You guide me to a place of seeing, seeing happens, and a return to believing the content of thoughts occurs, followed by all manner of negativity.

Yes, but all of these happens as a result of conditioning. And every time this is seen, the conditioning weaken a bit.

I apologize for that. It must be frustrating.

There is nothing to apologize for :) If frustration occurred it was only due to my own projection. Only ‘my’ interpretation or thoughts can be frustrating, not ‘you’ or your words or the situation.

When you say "notice this about thoughts" I try to DO something, rather than simply observe, and the end result can be unpleasant. I also know that that is an opportunity,

Yes, this is a very good observation. Doing something only strengthens what was intended to get rid of. It has always been just a mirage in the desert. But trying to get rid of the mirage ‘makes’ look the mirage as if it were real. If it was seen only as a mirage, there wouldn’t be a need to get rid of it. The illusion doesn’t need to be eliminated, how could nothing be eliminated? It is enough to see it only as a mirage, an illusion.

When it happens, it happens on its own. So I don't know what to do other than to just sort of relax and let what's going to happen happen.

Exactly. NOTHING has to be done! :)

Thanks for being patient, and thanks for being here with me through everything so far.

You’re very welcome :)

Again I apologize for the long delay in replying. My schedule permits me less time than it did in September, and I'm not sure I can maintain a pace like that going forward.

When it is clearly seen that there has never been a self that could control or govern life or anything, as a next step, there will be further six questions to ask as part of this guiding process. The response is then shared with other guides. They may or may not have further questions.

Once it is confirmed by other guides that seeing through the illusion of the self has happened, our conversation in this thread will come to an end, however you won’t be left alone. There is a whole community of others on FB, who have also seen through the ‘self’. Actually, there are several groups to join.

Furthermore, if you wish we can continue our conversation in a new thread to help deepening. After gate-ing communications don’t have any pre-set rules, we can write whenever we feel to.

So the big questions are:

Has it been clearly seen that there has never been an ‘I’ that could control or own life or anything?
Is there an 'I' of any kind whatsoever that could be responsible for anything at all?
Do others have responsibilities?

Is there a 'you' that started this investigation?
Has there ever been a 'you' doing anything?

Are you ready for the final six questions?

Love, Vivien

[bowlington]

I hope that I didn't give the wrong impression. My experience was very clear, but also brief, and not recurring. I know that it's a matter of conditioning, and now it feels like it's a matter of time but, there's no sense of finality here. Not that I'm expecting there to be one, I know that would just be thoughts and whether thoughts like that arise or not have no bearing on what's happened. I just don't want to claim an accomplishment that may not have occurred. I'm just not sure. New territory and all that.

Should I continue with the questions?

[Vivien]

Dear Brian,

I hope that I didn't give the wrong impression. My experience was very clear, but also brief, and not recurring.

Your denial is fascinating! :)

One moment of clear seeing is enough to see through the illusion of the self!
One moment of clear seeing that the arising thought is ‘real’ but never its content, is enough.
One moment of clear seeing that labels have no one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’ is enough.
One moment of clear seeing that in the actual experience there is no body is enough.

After seeing these, doubts still can arise. However, doubt is nothing more than the content of an arising thought, nothing more, nothing serious, nothing ‘real’.

I know that it's a matter of conditioning, and now it feels like it's a matter of time but, there's no sense of finality here. Not that I'm expecting there to be one,

Are you not expecting finality? REALLY? Just read this sentence above. There is a HUGE expectation to having a ‘sense of finality’.

How could a ‘sense of finality’ experienced, with which of the 5 senses?

There is no sense of finality and NEVER will be:

• - It cannot be sensed, because it is NOT a feeling or a sensation. It is just a THOUGHT.
  - Secondly, this process has NO END! So there never will be a ‘sense of finality’… You can wait until the end of your life and still there won’t be…

Should I continue with the questions?

OK, let’s skim my last questions for a while. Rather go back my questions posted on 04 October and please reply to those. Don’t leave anything out. Do the exercises on thoughts and others. I’ve copied them here for making it easier:

Exercise on thoughts

Please go through these questions, and answer them one-by-one. Don’t miss any. Don’t just think about them, don’t guess, but LOOK.

What is this ‘I’ that doing the thinking?
How this ‘I’ does the thinking?
Where is the 'I' that controls thoughts?
Where is the 'I' that has ownership of thoughts?
What do the thoughts belong to? What owns them?

Do you think thoughts or do thoughts think you?
Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Including the thought 'I'?

Exercise on others

OK, let’s examine ‘others’.
Here is a little exercise. Next time when you talk to someone you can observe this:

There is a sound (voice of the other) and a sight that is labelled as the 'other body'. But, is there any link between the sound and the sight, meaning that the sound is coming from that sight (the other) or only thoughts and mental constructs link them?

What are others in direct experience?
How others are experienced?
Are there others independently from ‘my’ interpretation?

Love, Vivien

[bowlington]

Your denial is fascinating!

Sorry. Maybe my conditioning is just very heavy and deceptive.

Are you not expecting finality? REALLY?

Truly. I understand that such a thing would be the content of a thought, and may or may not arise, as any thought may or may not arise, and has no bearing on what is real. I understand that thoughts are real, but their content never is. The content of thought is always a fantasy.

I'll need until the weekend to respond to your questions.

[Vivien]

Dear Brian,

Vivien: Your denial is fascinating!

Brian: Sorry. Maybe my conditioning is just very heavy and deceptive.

Dear Brian, I hope you know that I’m not criticizing here. :) I’m just pointing where to look.

I understand that thoughts are real, but their content never is. The content of thought is always a fantasy.

Good.

I'll need until the weekend to respond to your questions.

I’ve been thinking how to proceed from here, and what came up is that we spent way too much time and energy on talking on expectations and ‘reasons’ why looking is not happening and analysing the whole situation.

What I suggest to do is to start it again with some (or many) of the exercises without any commentary from both of us, why is it not going well and things like that. I’ll also stop ‘convincing’ you that you can see this, etc. :)

So just pure exercises, pure looking – without any of us intellectually analysing it – to help deepen the seeing.

Can you agree with it?

--

For your convenient, I’ve copied here the last two exercises again:

Exercise on thoughts

Please go through these questions, and answer them one-by-one. Don’t miss any. Don’t just think about them, don’t guess, but LOOK.

What is this ‘I’ that doing the thinking?
How this ‘I’ does the thinking?
Where is the 'I' that controls thoughts?
Where is the 'I' that has ownership of thoughts?
What do the thoughts belong to? What owns them?

Do you think thoughts or you are just being thought?
Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Including the thought 'I'?

--

Exercise on others

OK, let’s examine ‘others’.
Here is a little exercise. Next time when you talk to someone you can observe this:

There is a sound (voice of the other) and a sight that is labelled as the 'other body'. But, is there any link between the sound and the sight, meaning that the sound is coming from that sight (the other) or only thoughts and mental constructs link them?

What are others in direct experience?
How others are experienced?
Are there others independently from ‘my’ interpretation?

Love, Viven

[bowlington]

Vivien,

What I suggest to do is to start it again with some (or many) of the exercises without any commentary from both of us, why is it not going well and things like that. I’ll also stop ‘convincing’ you that you can see this, etc. :)

So just pure exercises, pure looking – without any of us intellectually analysing it – to help deepen the seeing.

Can you agree with it?

I think so. Will I still be posting answers to your questions as before?

The way I understand what you're suggesting is that you'll ask questions, I'll look for an answer and reply, but will try not to veer into "thinking", and instead only talk about seeing. Is that right?

If so, then yes I am agreeable. I'll work to stay focused as you've described.

Brian

[Vivien]

Dear Brian,

The way I understand what you're suggesting is that you'll ask questions, I'll look for an answer and reply, but will try not to veer into "thinking", and instead only talk about seeing. Is that right?

Yes, exactly this is what I meant :)

If so, then yes I am agreeable. I'll work to stay focused as you've described.

Good. Then I’ll wait for your reply to those exercises.

Love, Vivien