Guide request

[rvh]

You seem pretty clear but we will go a little deeper here.

The head has eyes that see regardless.

Can you know in your own direct experience of "eyes" and a "head"?

Yes. I can touch my head or look in a mirror and see my head and eyes.

Yes, it is perfectly conceivable that LOOKING is just occurring.

That's not really answering the question.
Is there something looking. Or is there just looking. It's not a maybe or it's possible. Closer to a yes or no. Really look closely at it.

There is just looking.

There is no need for a self.
There is NO NEED for an "I" to DO any of those things.

It's not that there is no need. It's that there isn't a self.

Yes. It can't be found anywhere other than thoughts about "I".

LOOKING as in physical eyes,

Looking as were referring to it (if I were to describe it) is bringing attention into direct experience where you are without a doubt... and then seeing if there is actually a self or not. Or any thought for that matter.

This is tricky.

How do you "bringing attention into direct experience where you are without a doubt"?

...and what context do you mean by "Or any thought for that matter"?

A problem I have is when I have my attention on the thinking process, to watch what is going on, thoughts stop!

It's like the mind doesn't want to be observed.

I think this was because I have watched a lot of Non-Dual videos for the last 2 years.

That'll do it.
Something I tell people is trust your own experience. Look deep into your own experience. This way it is your own experience. Not words from a secondary source.

Yes. Definitely.

Thanks again for your patience,

rvh

[rvh]

codyjdennis wrote:
You seem pretty clear but we will go a little deeper here.
The head has eyes that see regardless.

Can you know in your own direct experience of "eyes" and a "head"?

Yes. I can touch my head or look in a mirror and see my head and eyes.

Yes, it is perfectly conceivable that LOOKING is just occurring.

That's not really answering the question.
Is there something looking. Or is there just looking. It's not a maybe or it's possible. Closer to a yes or no. Really look closely at it.

There is just looking.

There is no need for a self.
There is NO NEED for an "I" to DO any of those things.

It's not that there is no need. It's that there isn't a self.

Yes. It can't be found anywhere other than thoughts about "I".

LOOKING as in physical eyes,

Looking as were referring to it (if I were to describe it) is bringing attention into direct experience where you are without a doubt... and then seeing if there is actually a self or not. Or any thought for that matter.

This is tricky.

How do you "bringing attention into direct experience where you are without a doubt"?

...and what context do you mean by "Or any thought for that matter"?

A problem I have is when I have my attention on the thinking process, to watch what is going on, thoughts stop!

It's like the mind doesn't want to be observed.

I think this was because I have watched a lot of Non-Dual videos for the last 2 years.

That'll do it.
Something I tell people is trust your own experience. Look deep into your own experience. This way it is your own experience. Not words from a secondary source.

Yes. Definitely.

Thanks again for your patience,

rvh

[rvh]

Sorry, I thought I had lost the post and posted twice.

Didn't realise it had 2nd page.

Looking as were referring to it (if I were to describe it) is bringing attention into direct experience where you are without a doubt... and then seeing if there is actually a self or not.

Yes, this is the heart of the matter.

Doesn't appear to be easy at this stage.

Or any thought for that matter

This part I'm not sure what you mean.

If you mean any thought about self, then yes there are many.

rvh

[codyjdennis]

Yes. I can touch my head or look in a mirror and see my head and eyes.

Try this for me. Close your eyes. Touch something like a desk. Then keeping your eyes closed, touch what you consider your 'body'.

Here are a couple questions for you regarding that.

1) With your eyes closed, where do 'you' end and begin?

2) What is actually happening here? Go directly to the experience of touching and tell me what you find.
Is there any real difference?

There is just looking.

Yes :)

Yes. It can't be found anywhere other than thoughts about "I"

Nice!

How do you "bringing attention into direct experience where you are "without a doubt"?

What I mean by this is that our "attention" can wander to our imagination. That is still part of our 'experience'...however we are not actually looking in our direct experience (touching, smelling, seeing etc) we are sifting through thought.

So, that's why I said that. There is not an effort to be here but attention can be lost in thought and not brought into our actual reality.

...and what context do you mean by "Or any thought for that matter"?

This is what I mean. Try to find the word "World" in actual experience. Can it be found? Or is it as imaginary as 'I'? :)


Respond to this. Well talk more later tonight.

- Cody

[rvh]

Try this for me. Close your eyes. Touch something like a desk. Then keeping your eyes closed, touch what you consider your 'body'.

Here are a couple questions for you regarding that.

1) With your eyes closed, where do 'you' end and begin?

I can't find any boundary.

2) What is actually happening here? Go directly to the experience of touching and tell me what you find.
Is there any real difference?

There is no difference between touching the desk and my body. Except that there is sensation on my body as well as hand.

There is just touching.

How do you "bringing attention into direct experience where you are "without a doubt"?

What I mean by this is that our "attention" can wander to our imagination. That is still part of our 'experience'...however we are not actually looking in our direct experience (touching, smelling, seeing etc) we are sifting through thought.

So, that's why I said that. There is not an effort to be here but attention can be lost in thought and not brought into our actual reality.

Yes.

That is clear.

I am consciously trying to remain "aware" instead of "lost" in thought, but thoughts stop when I try to "watch" them, and then at some point "lost" in thought occurs.

...and what context do you mean by "Or any thought for that matter"?

This is what I mean. Try to find the word "World" in actual experience. Can it be found? Or is it as imaginary as 'I'? :)

No the word can't be found.

Are you saying the world is imaginary?

Or that there is no separation between anything? I can see this. Some of the time. :-)))

Oh, I see. You are saying ALL THOUGHTS are imaginary.

Yes, I get this.

Thanks,

rvh

[codyjdennis]

I can't find any boundary.

Very nice :)

There is no difference between touching the desk and my body. Except that there is sensation on my body as well as hand.

There is just touching.

Yesss!

I will add here as well..
Notice how thoughts label "my body" as opposed to the "other object". Thought creates the separation. We do not need to get rid of thought. Just see it for what it is.

I am consciously trying to remain "aware" instead of "lost" in thought, but thoughts stop when I try to "watch" them, and then at some point "lost" in thought occurs.

Great. The important thing here is to see if there is actually a self at all. Because then it is not a personal thing. Just gently bring the attention back and look again.

Are you saying the world is imaginary?

Or that there is no separation between anything? I can see this. Some of the time. :-)))

Oh, I see. You are saying ALL THOUGHTS are imaginary.

:D I loved this

Yes. ALL THOUGHTS are imaginary. Pure imagination. Notice now how what we call reality is here no matter what.

And It is not that "reality" is not real but thoughts have nothing to do with reality.

[rvh]

There is no difference between touching the desk and my body. Except that there is sensation on my body as well as hand.

There is just touching.

Yesss!

I will add here as well..
Notice how thoughts label "my body" as opposed to the "other object". Thought creates the separation. We do not need to get rid of thought. Just see it for what it is.

This is interesting :-)))

I am consciously trying to remain "aware" instead of "lost" in thought, but thoughts stop when I try to "watch" them, and then at some point "lost" in thought occurs.

Great. The important thing here is to see if there is actually a self at all. Because then it is not a personal thing. Just gently bring the attention back and look again.

OK. I see this is the main issue right now.

This is the KEY as discovered by Ciaran.

However, I feel like there is no point trying to see if there is a self, because I know intellectually that it does not exist.

Also, after looking for a self, I cannot find a self, and it makes me feel frustrated to look for something that is not there.

I know that I need to persist to look, because there seems to be some realisation that occurs during this looking process.

Yes, I know this is key, and so I continue to look.

It WILL happen soon, during this process.

Or maybe it already has, and this process is OVER RUN.

I feel like I need to be CERTAIN.

Are you saying the world is imaginary?

Or that there is no separation between anything? I can see this. Some of the time. :-)))

Oh, I see. You are saying ALL THOUGHTS are imaginary.

:D I loved this

Yes. ALL THOUGHTS are imaginary. Pure imagination. Notice now how what we call reality is here no matter what.

And It is not that "reality" is not real but thoughts have nothing to do with reality.

[/quote]

So the ENTIRE PROBLEM is thoughts?

That makes sense.

Let me LOOK at this for a while.

Thanks Cody,

Nice Pointing :-))

[rvh]

Some "Ideas" I have about this.

Thoughts commentate on everything.

Thoughts apply their "SPIN" on what is being experienced.

This "SPIN" is in accordance with thoughts "AGENDA".

Thoughts "AGENDA" is that there is a separate self.

Maybe thoughts don't just arise spontaneously.

Maybe there is an "AGENDA" dictated by some other agency that has control of thoughts.

I note that Ciaran almost died, as he described in "The Thunder and the Sunshine".

He felt like "Parasitic thoughts" tried to kill him because he was getting too close to understanding the mechanism of thoughts and was posting about their agenda on Ruthless Truth Arena.

This is a bit "Out There", I know.

However, I can really see the possibility of this now!

Just sayin'

[codyjdennis]

I feel like I need to be CERTAIN.

If you want to be certain. Look right now and see if you can find a self.

Then throughout the day check if you can find one. Not intellectually but experientially.

Then answer the question...

Is there ever one?

It WILL happen soon, during this process.

Wanted to clarify something here. We look in experience right now because we are looking at something that is already the case. This "no-self" IS right now. It cannot be attained or lost because it IS. It's not going to happen soon or in the future. Where is soon or future other than more thought?


It's more 'accurate' to say we just slightly overlooked our own direct experience. That's all.

Please check this out for yourself by looking at the first question. (Is there ever a self besides a thought?)

So the ENTIRE PROBLEM is thoughts?

Thoughts commentate on everything.

Thoughts apply their "SPIN" on what is being experienced.

This "SPIN" is in accordance with thoughts "AGENDA".

Thoughts "AGENDA" is that there is a separate self.

Maybe thoughts don't just arise spontaneously.

Maybe there is an "AGENDA" dictated by some other agency that has control of thoughts.

I note that Ciaran almost died, as he described in "The Thunder and the Sunshine".

He felt like "Parasitic thoughts" tried to kill him because he was getting too close to understanding the mechanism of thoughts and was posting about their agenda on Ruthless Truth Arena.

Thoughts are not problems. They do as you say, comment on everything, have an 'agenda' etc but be interested in this.

What is this I who would have a problem with them?

[rvh]

(Is there ever a self besides a thought?)

What is this I who would have a problem with them?

Is there ever one?

OK

Focussing on just this now

[codyjdennis]

Great :)

Take your time. No rush

[rvh]

I can't find any self apart from thoughts about a self.

My personality is just thoughts.

At times I found what feels like emptiness.

Like there is nothing but space.

Eyes were closed.

This seemed difficult to see.

Not effortless.

This was when I focused a certain way.

There was no "realization of no-self" experience though.

I still feel like a separate human being on planet Earth.

Feeling a bit frustrated.

[rvh]

I really thought this was going to be easy :-))

[codyjdennis]

rvh,

It is easy :-).

I can't find any self apart from thoughts about a self.

That's it rvh :). That simple. It is just a thought.

There was no "realization of no-self" experience though.

What were you expecting to happen? ;)

Seeing this is not how they make it out out to be in spirituality. It's simple & ordinary. That's partly why it's so overlooked.

------
I understand you're frustrated. Just take a deep breath and bare with me. You're doing great.

Now, that a self is seen to be just a thought.

Can a word, I, think? or does thinking just happen?

[rvh]

There was no "realization of no-self" experience though.

What were you expecting to happen? ;)

I thought there would be some AHA or something.

But I had already seen that there is no self, so maybe that is why.

And I had the big AHA moment when I saw that the body just moves itself.

I understand you're frustrated. Just take a deep breath and bare with me. You're doing great.

Thanks for the encouragement. :-)

Now, that a self is seen to be just a thought.

Can a word, I, think? or does thinking just happen?

[/quote]

Thinking just happens.

Ha Ha. Even my 8yo daughter "GOT" that within seconds, a few weeks ago :-))

Now she is telling everyone, embarrassing my wife :-))))

The issue is:

If I am deliberately looking for the no separation, I see it no problem.

But otherwise I still feel like a separate person.

If that makes sense?

Maybe this is OK and just how it supposed to be?