Looking for a guide to make me see the truth

[Sadhu]

Hey Kay!

So, i've spent the day trying to look at thoughts. Here are some of the things i noticed :

1) Thoughts fade away really quickly when i notice them, and there is a window of awareness, then the window of awareness fades away as a new thought comes, which is noticed again.
2) Thoughts and content of thoughts are different. Only the experience of thoughts is important, content is not.
3) Sometimes i get engrossed by contents of the thoughts if i don't become aware of them, and then feel emotion. If i look at the emotion, it fades away after a few seconds.
4) At times it was really hard to notice thoughts, as if there was a mist over looking. At times it was easy.
5) Thoughts seem connected, but in actuality, they seem to take content from previous thoughts. They are single and separate from each other. They seem to come from nothing, and fade away to nothing.

I shall keep looking at them, if i find more i will report :)

Love,
Sudha

[forgetmenot]

Hi Sadhu,

Some nice looking! :)

1) Thoughts fade away really quickly when i notice them, and there is a window of awareness, then the window of awareness fades away as a new thought comes, which is noticed again.

There is an assumption that the ‘awareness’ of a thought is different to a “window of awareness”.
Look carefully. In this seeming “window of awareness” is it devoid of thought or is there a thought that says there is a “window of awareness” between thoughts?

2) Thoughts and content of thoughts are different. Only the experience of thoughts is important, content is not.

The label ‘dog’ is AE of thought and not the AE of a dog.
The content that the label ‘dog’ points to is a story (ie “the dog is black and has a long nose and is barking”). HOWEVER, the story is ‘made up’ of thought and all thoughts are actual experience of thought.

Can you see this?

3) Sometimes i get engrossed by contents of the thoughts if i don't become aware of them, and then feel emotion. If i look at the emotion, it fades away after a few seconds.

It SEEMS that thought creates a sensation which is labelled “emotion”.
How is it known that thought creates sensation?

Contents of thought are made up of thoughts and all thoughts are AE of thought.
Thoughts are not aware of anything and cannot create anything.
Can a sensation know anything about a thought?
Can a thought know anything about a sensation?

4) At times it was really hard to notice thoughts, as if there was a mist over looking. At times it was easy.

So when the thought “at times it’s really hard to notice thoughts” appeared, is that not just another thought?

5) Thoughts seem connected, but in actuality, they seem to take content from previous thoughts. They are single and separate from each other. They seem to come from nothing, and fade away to nothing.

Yes, “they seem to come from nothing and fade away to nothing”. Nice looking!

It seems that thought has some logical ordered appearance, but look carefully and just notice if there is an organised sequence?
Or is that just another thought that says ‘these thoughts are in sequence’ or “they take content from previous thought”, or that ‘one thought follows another thought’?

While continuing to look at thoughts, here are a couple more to look at.

Can you predict the next thought?
Can you push away any thought?
Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts?
Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle?
Can anything choose not to have painful or negative thoughts?
Can anything pick and choose any kind of thought?
Is it possible to control any thoughts?

Much love
Kay

[Sadhu]

Hey Kay :)

There is an assumption that the ‘awareness’ of a thought is different to a “window of awareness”.
Look carefully. In this seeming “window of awareness” is it devoid of thought or is there a thought that says there is a “window of awareness” between thoughts?

I will look more into this.

The label ‘dog’ is AE of thought and not the AE of a dog.
The content that the label ‘dog’ points to is a story (ie “the dog is black and has a long nose and is barking”). HOWEVER, the story is ‘made up’ of thought and all thoughts are actual experience of thought.

Can you see this?

Yeah, i can see it. It's the same as hearing. If i hear the sound of a car passing by, it's the sound, not the car itself.
Im only experiencing the thought, not the actual dog, and im only experiencing the sound, not the car itself.
How does that go with the separate individual? Is it the same as if i would believe that a thought of a dog or a sound of a car is real, like actually a dog or a car, and not just experiences? Am i engrossed by that separate individual the same as when i accidently get carried away by the content of a thought?

So when the thought “at times it’s really hard to notice thoughts” appeared, is that not just another thought?

Yeah, it is.. but it was more like a feeling, like being unable to concentrate. Maybe i was just tired, haha.

It SEEMS that thought creates a sensation which is labelled “emotion”.
How is it known that thought creates sensation?

Contents of thought are made up of thoughts and all thoughts are AE of thought.
Thoughts are not aware of anything and cannot create anything.
Can a sensation know anything about a thought?
Can a thought know anything about a sensation?

I can see that.. and i understand that thought cannot create anything, or know anything, but why do emotions appear then? Or do they come from nothing, same as thoughts do?

Can you predict the next thought?
Can you push away any thought?
Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts?
Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle?
Can anything choose not to have painful or negative thoughts?
Can anything pick and choose any kind of thought?
Is it possible to control any thoughts?

No, i have zero control over the thoughts. Can't predict, can't push it away since if it goes silent, it will just resurface. Can't select positive/negative since it comes from nothing, and i can't pick or choose any thoughts.
The only thing that seems weird is the stopping the thought in the middle. I can't stop them, but if i become aware of them they dissipate quickly, it's like "message understood!" and they vanish.

I'll keep looking more :)

Love,
Sudha

[forgetmenot]

Hi Sadhu,

There is an assumption that the ‘awareness’ of a thought is different to a “window of awareness”.
Look carefully. In this seeming “window of awareness” is it devoid of thought or is there a thought that says there is a “window of awareness” between thoughts?

I will look more into this.

Please don't respond to posts until you can answer all questions at once from the same post. Questions and exercises will get 'lost' if they are not looked at and answered at the same time leaving 'gaps' in 'looking'. This only hinders the seeing through the 'self'. This might all sound rather pedantic, however, trust me...it's not.

Love Kay

[Sadhu]

Hey Kay,

There is an assumption that the ‘awareness’ of a thought is different to a “window of awareness”.
Look carefully. In this seeming “window of awareness” is it devoid of thought or is there a thought that says there is a “window of awareness” between thoughts?

Yeah, i understand what you mean that there is no difference in awareness. Awareness is awareness.

It seems both happen sometimes. Generally, there is no thought after i look at one, only clarity. Rarely but it happens, a thought pops up - "look, no thoughts here". It's a thought aswell, heh.

Please don't respond to posts until you can answer all questions at once from the same post. Questions and exercises will get 'lost' if they are not looked at and answered at the same time leaving 'gaps' in 'looking'. This only hinders the seeing through the 'self'. This might all sound rather pedantic, however, trust me...it's not.

I understand and i trust you :)
Lesson learned, i'll answer them all at once even if it takes a little longer, haha. If it takes more than a day ill post saying i need a little more time. :)

Love,
Sadhu

[forgetmenot]

Hey Sadhu!

The questions that I ask, I literally want you to STOP and have a look and answer from the place of ‘looking’. When I ask “what exactly is it that can think”, I want you to have a look for what it is that ‘can think’! Please do NOT give me an answer because it is thought the answer is already known…that is intellectual. I want you to actually ‘SEE’ if there is anything that is actually thinking!

You have seen what it is to look at thoughts…so looking for what exactly it is that ‘can think’ is the same. I want you to look everywhere, including what is thought to be the ‘big toes’ to see if you can find exactly what it is that ‘can think’!

There is an assumption that the ‘awareness’ of a thought is different to a “window of awareness”.
Look carefully. In this seeming “window of awareness” is it devoid of thought or is there a thought that says there is a “window of awareness” between thoughts?

Yeah, i understand what you mean that there is no difference in awareness. Awareness is awareness.
It seems both happen sometimes. Generally, there is no thought after i look at one, only clarity. Rarely but it happens, a thought pops up - "look, no thoughts here". It's a thought aswell, heh.

Hmmm…I would like for you to sit again and take your time and have a look at this, and look very very carefully, then report back please!

The label ‘dog’ is AE of thought and not the AE of a dog.
The content that the label ‘dog’ points to is a story (ie “the dog is black and has a long nose and is barking”). HOWEVER, the story is ‘made up’ of thought and all thoughts are actual experience of thought.
Can you see this?

Yeah, i can see it. It's the same as hearing. If i hear the sound of a car passing by, it's the sound, not the car itself.

Where exactly is the ‘separate individual’ labelled “I” located that is hearing “the sound of a car passing by”?

Im only experiencing the thought, not the actual dog, and im only experiencing the sound, not the car itself.

Describe to me exactly the ‘separate individual’ labelled “I” that is “experiencing thought”?
Where exactly is the ‘separate individual’ labelled “I” located, that is “experiencing the sound”?
What exactly is it that is “experiencing”?

How does that go with the separate individual? Is it the same as if i would believe that a thought of a dog or a sound of a car is real, like actually a dog or a car, and not just experiences? Am i engrossed by that separate individual the same as when i accidently get carried away by the content of a thought?

There is no “I” and a ‘separate individual’.
Describe to me the “I” and where it can be found and describe to me the ‘separate individual’ and where it can be found.

There is absolutely no difference between a mental image of a dog or car; or the ‘visual’ image of a dog or a car they are both actual experience of image + sound and one is no more real than the other.

It SEEMS that thought creates a sensation which is labelled “emotion”.
How is it known that thought creates sensation?

Contents of thought are made up of thoughts and all thoughts are AE of thought.
Thoughts are not aware of anything and cannot create anything.
Can a sensation know anything about a thought?
Can a thought know anything about a sensation?

I can see that.. and i understand that thought cannot create anything, or know anything, but why do emotions appear then?

You are not looking, you are wanting me to answer your questions and by me answering your questions and getting my answers does not get you to ‘see’ what is. Please answer the questions.

It SEEMS that thought creates a sensation which is labelled “emotion”.
How is it known that thought creates sensation?

Or do they come from nothing, same as thoughts do?

Look carefully. Can a beginning point to where thoughts start and an ending point to where thoughts end be found?

The only thing that seems weird is the stopping the thought in the middle. I can't stop them, but if i become aware of them they dissipate quickly, it's like "message understood!" and they vanish.

What exactly is it that is “understanding messages”?

Please answer ALL questions in blue, and answer them from a place of 'looking'.

Love Kay

[Sadhu]

Hey Kay,

I just realised something. I was trying to look at things from the "look" perspective, but i was actually trying to rationalise it intellectually. I realised all i have to do is look. Sorry for not realising it sooner, haha.

I'll try to look at everything you gave me, but i'm not sure how to exactly "look",and i kinda feel insecure about how i'm gonna do it, so i'll just wing it and report, haha. I guess that's a part of seeing, learning how to look.

Thank you for your patience. Really :)

Love,
Sudha

[Sadhu]

You have seen what it is to look at thoughts…so looking for what exactly it is that ‘can think’ is the same. I want you to look everywhere, including what is thought to be the ‘big toes’ to see if you can find exactly what it is that ‘can think’!

Oh, just found it. Okay, that makes it easier, sorry for double post.

Love,
Sudha

[forgetmenot]

Hi Sadhu,

Looking isn’t difficult. It doesn’t require any special skills. ‘Looking” is just plain looking to what is here right now. When you need your car keys and look everywhere for them – that is looking. It’s the ‘awareness’ of and ‘use’ of sound, taste, smell, sensation and images to explore what is always available, as well as noticing the 'presence' of a thought - not thinking, but noticing or being ‘aware’ of a thought/s.

For example: Looking for what can 'think'.

Can a sound think?
Can a taste think?
Can a smell think?
Can a sensation think?
Can an image think? (the 'body' is an image)
Can a thought think?

If none of those can think, what exactly is it that can 'think'?

Love Kay

[Sadhu]

That makes perfect sense! Thank you! I'll report tomorrow after i look at every question you posted.

Love Sadhu

[forgetmenot]

Excellent!

I noticed that I didn't highlight the following in blue....but it is also a question I would like for you to answer.

Or do they come from nothing, same as thoughts do?

Look carefully. Can a beginning point to where thoughts start and an ending point to where thoughts end be found?


Love Kay

[Sadhu]

There is an assumption that the ‘awareness’ of a thought is different to a “window of awareness”.
Look carefully. In this seeming “window of awareness” is it devoid of thought or is there a thought that says there is a “window of awareness” between thoughts?

Yeah, there were thoughts saying - this is the one second gap between thoughts. It seems the period without thought happens by itself, it doesn't depend on thoughts.. The period without thoughts doesn't have any senses or thoughts to it, or image..

Where exactly is the ‘separate individual’ labelled “I” located that is hearing “the sound of a car passing by”?

Huh.. i tried placing them into "body" and "mind", checking through seeing, hearing etc, but that didn't work, since it's not the body or the mind that does the seeing or hearing, i also wanted to write "it's the senses that do that" but i tried placing "senses" through the list, and that didn't work either, so i tried placing "separate individual" and "I" and they can't sense or think.. It seems that hearing happens by itself, haha. I used the example you gave me, and worked on that. Hopefully i'm doing it right this time.

Describe to me exactly the ‘separate individual’ labelled “I” that is “experiencing thought”?

Tried the same thing.. "separate individual" can't see, hear, smell, taste, feel or think.. it doesn't seem to have any image, so how am i supposed to describe something that doesn't have anything?

Where exactly is the ‘separate individual’ labelled “I” located, that is “experiencing the sound”?

Tried "mind", "body", "heart", "soul", "chest" (remember that feeling in the chest i talked about before? yeah, i checked that aswell), "head", and they all can't think/sense.. so if they can't do anything, or contain anything, i don't see how "separate individual" can go into them. It can't go into senses, thoughts or image. This is weird, haha.

What exactly is it that is “experiencing”?

Seeing, smelling, tasting, hearing, thoughts can't experience.. it happens by itself ?

Describe to me the “I” and where it can be found and describe to me the ‘separate individual’ and where it can be found.

"I" isn't the senses/thoughts, and it can't be found in senses/thoughts.. what else is there except those?
"Separate individual" same as above..

It SEEMS that thought creates a sensation which is labelled “emotion”.
How is it known that thought creates sensation?

It can't..

Look carefully. Can a beginning point to where thoughts start and an ending point to where thoughts end be found?

Where do thoughts start/end?.. Not in the senses/thoughts, and there isn't anything else except senses/thoughts, so nowhere.

What exactly is it that is “understanding messages”?

Can hearing, seeing, smelling, tasting feeling understand messages? No..
Can thoughts understand messages? No..
So uh, nothing again?

Okay, so i tried to do it from the point of looking, but i'm not sure if i did it correctly, since i think all the questions have "nothing" for answers, so yeah :D Feeling a little confusion here, but at the same time it seems right.. ugh :D

Also, it seems like we have some huge fake social constructs inside ourselves (yeah, just had that thought). If nothing can sense/think... then what's the deal with all of this? But what can seem though? Nothing can seem, so is even this idea not real? Ow, my head :D

Love Sadhu

[forgetmenot]

Hi Sadhu!

Yay! Nice looking! :)

Yeah, there were thoughts saying - this is the one second gap between thoughts. It seems the period without thought happens by itself, it doesn't depend on thoughts.. The period without thoughts doesn't have any senses or thoughts to it, or image..

There is never ‘nothing happening’, that is only a thought that says that!
Even when sitting quietly there is sound that is heard labelled ‘ringing in the ears’.
There is a sensation that is labelled ‘breeze’, or ‘tingling’ and as those are occurring…automatic labelling occurs, but we don’t notice it because we are used of it and don’t realise that those automatic labels are thoughts.

Try it again and report back!

Where exactly is the ‘separate individual’ labelled “I” located that is hearing “the sound of a car passing by”?

Huh.. i tried placing them into "body" and "mind", checking through seeing, hearing etc, but that didn't work, since it's not the body or the mind that does the seeing or hearing

What exactly is it that has a ‘body’?
What exactly is it that has a ‘mind’?

It seems that hearing happens by itself, haha. I used the example you gave me, and worked on that. Hopefully i'm doing it right this time.

Wonderful looking! :)
Where is the dividing line between ‘hearing’ and ‘hearer’?

Describe to me exactly the ‘separate individual’ labelled “I” that is “experiencing thought”?

Tried the same thing.. "separate individual" can't see, hear, smell, taste, feel or think.. it doesn't seem to have any image, so how am i supposed to describe something that doesn't have anything?

Yes, spot on! Nice looking :)

Let’s break it down for clarity.

- The label/thought ‘separate individual’ is the AE of thought and NOT the AE of a ‘separate individual’.
- The sensation labelled ‘body’ is the AE of sensation and NOT the AE of a ‘body’/’separate individual’
- The image labelled ‘body’ is AE of image and NOT the AE of a ‘body’/’separate individual’.
- The sound labelled ‘voice’ is AE of sound and NOT the AE of a ‘voice’.
- The taste labelled ‘sweat’ is the AE of taste and NOT the AE of ‘sweat’.
- The smell labelled ‘sweat’ is the AE of smell and NOT the AE of ‘sweat’.

Is this clear?

What exactly is it that is “experiencing”?

Seeing, smelling, tasting, hearing, thoughts can't experience.. it happens by itself ?

BINGO! Yes exactly! Terrific looking! :)
So it is clear that there is no ‘separate individual’ that is ‘experiencing’?

Describe to me the “I” and where it can be found and describe to me the ‘separate individual’ and where it can be found.

"I" isn't the senses/thoughts, and it can't be found in senses/thoughts.. what else is there except those? "Separate individual" same as above..

Exactly!

It SEEMS that thought creates a sensation which is labelled “emotion”.
How is it known that thought creates sensation?

It can't..

No it can’t - exactly!
Thoughts do not create sensations.
It is ONLY a thought that says thought creates sensation.
Is this clear?

What is the AE of 'emotion'?

Look carefully. Can a beginning point to where thoughts start and an ending point to where thoughts end be found?

Where do thoughts start/end?.. Not in the senses/thoughts, and there isn't anything else except senses/thoughts, so nowhere.

Yes, nowhere! A beginning and an ending not only implies time – and there is no time (or space/gaps). It also implies a ‘separate individual’ that is ‘doing something’!

What exactly is it that is “understanding messages”?

Can hearing, seeing, smelling, tasting feeling understand messages? No..
Can thoughts understand messages? No..
So uh, nothing again?

Yup! :)

Okay, so i tried to do it from the point of looking, but i'm not sure if i did it correctly, since i think all the questions have "nothing" for answers, so yeah :D Feeling a little confusion here, but at the same time it seems right.. ugh :D

What exactly is it that is “feeling a little confusion here”?
What is the AE of ‘confusion’?

Also, it seems like we have some huge fake social constructs inside ourselves (yeah, just had that thought). If nothing can sense/think... then what's the deal with all of this? But what can seem though? Nothing can seem, so is even this idea not real? Ow, my head :D

Haha!

What exactly is it that has a ‘head’?
What is the AE of ‘head’?

Please answer all the questions in blue and don’t forget to LOOK.

Much love Kay

[Sadhu]

Hey!

Yay! Nice looking! :)

Yay :)

There is never ‘nothing happening’, that is only a thought that says that!
Even when sitting quietly there is sound that is heard labelled ‘ringing in the ears’.
There is a sensation that is labelled ‘breeze’, or ‘tingling’ and as those are occurring…automatic labelling occurs, but we don’t notice it because we are used of it and don’t realise that those automatic labels are thoughts.

Try it again and report back!

Oh my god. I just realized something. I was trying to wrap my head around this thing, at first intellectually (don't kill me, haha), thinking that maybe it is like the stream of conciousness in psychology, like a river, but that didn't make much sense, "what are those windows of awareness then?" i thought, and then i stopped and looked. I was looking inside at thoughts, and every time a thought passed i noticed it, and then there was this feeling of awareness. Then i realised, this feeling of awareness is a thought aswell. It's all just one big, huge thought, or more like a neverending, neverstopping stream. It's exactly like that annoying background ringing in the ears we all have when everything is absolutely silent. Did i get it? :)

What exactly is it that has a ‘body’?
What exactly is it that has a ‘mind’?

Thought, seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, feeling don't have a body or a mind. So nothing.

Where is the dividing line between ‘hearing’ and ‘hearer’?

Dividing line isn't a thought, or seeing/hearing/smelling/tasting or a feeling, so hearing and hearer are one..
So thinking and thinker are one, seeing and seer are one, taster and tasting are one, and smelling and smeller are one? So we are one with pretty much everything, lol.

Is this clear?

Yeah.
Seeing a tree is the direct experience of seeing, not of a tree. :)

So it is clear that there is no ‘separate individual’ that is ‘experiencing’?

Yeah, it is clear, but it doesn't change anything.. i think i have been expecting some more noticeable change. And yeah, thought/senses can't expect change, i can see that, but it's like i'm still expecting something. I believe i should drop all expectations, but how do i do that? And yeah, there is nothing to drop, but it's like i'm still holding onto something. And nothing to hold onto.. this is like going down the rabbit's hole.

Is this clear?

What is the AE of 'emotion'?

Yeah. Feeling. Emotion is just a feeling.

What exactly is it that is “feeling a little confusion here”?
What is the AE of ‘confusion’?

Not thoughts/sensations.. also, a question : is there anything else like thoughts/sensations? It feels like there is more than just thoughts and sensations. In the article about direct experience, it says that there is an "unmistakeable sense of aliveness"

AE of confusion is feeling.

What exactly is it that has a ‘head’?
What is the AE of ‘head’?

Not thoughts/sensations.

Image.

Love, Sadhu :)

[forgetmenot]

Good morning, Sadhu!

Then i realised, this feeling of awareness is a thought aswell. It's all just one big, huge thought, or more like a neverending, neverstopping stream. It's exactly like that annoying background ringing in the ears we all have when everything is absolutely silent. Did i get it? :)

Yes, “feeling of awareness” is just another thought. Being ‘aware’ of something implies object/subject split which = two.

What exactly is it that will “get it”?

Where is the dividing line between ‘hearing’ and ‘hearer’?

Dividing line isn't a thought, or seeing/hearing/smelling/tasting or a feeling, so hearing and hearer are one.. So thinking and thinker are one, seeing and seer are one, taster and tasting are one, and smelling and smeller are one? So we are one with pretty much everything, lol.

What EXACTLY is ‘thinking’?
What EXACTLY is the ‘thinker of thoughts’?
What is the AE of hearing/hearer?
What is the AE of seeing/seer?
What is the AE of smelling/smell?

There is no such thing as “one”. One implies that there must have been two of something, which is object/subject split.

Yeah.
Seeing a tree is the direct experience of seeing, not of a tree. :)

The label “tree” is the AE of thought and NOT the AE of a tree.
The image labelled “tree” is the AE of an image NOT the AE of a “tree” or of “seeing”.
The label “seeing’ is the AE of thought and NOT the AE of “seeing”.

Is this clear?

What exactly is it that is ‘seeing’?
What is the AE of ‘seeing’?

i think i have been expecting some more noticeable change. And yeah, thought/senses can't expect change, i can see that, but it's like i'm still expecting something. I believe i should drop all expectations, but how do i do that? And yeah, there is nothing to drop, but it's like i'm still holding onto something. And nothing to hold onto.. this is like going down the rabbit's hole.

Where is the 'separate individual' that "thinks they have been expecting more noticeable change" located?

What is the AE of “expectation”? Let’s break it down and have a LOOK

Does the label “I” know anything about expectation?
Does the label “expectation” know anything about expectation?
Does the sensation labelled “expectation” know anything about expectation?
Does the image labelled ‘body’ know anything about expectation?

How is it known that label/thought + sensation + image = “expectation”?
Could it be that thought marries these together and says these are appearing because of “expectation”?
This is cause and effect. There is no such thing as cause and effect.

So what is the AE of “expectation”?
The AE of “expectation” is thought. The content of the label “expectation” is a story and is pure fiction.

Can you see this?

What exactly is it that is “still holding onto something”? Or is “still holding onto something” just a thought?

What is the AE of 'emotion'?

Yeah. Feeling. Emotion is just a feeling.

NO. There is no such thing as “feeling” or “emotion”.

What exactly is “feeling” or “having emotions”?

Break it down and LOOK

Does the label “emotion/feeling” know anything about emotion/feeling?
Does the sensation labelled “emotion/feeling” know anything about emotion/feeling?
Does the image labelled ‘body’ know anything about emotion/feeling?

The label “emotion” is the AE of thought - NOT the AE of “emotion/feeling”.
The label “feeling” is the AE of thought – NOT the AE of feeling.
The sensation labelled “emotion/feeling” is the AE of sensation – NOT the AE of “emotion/feeling”.
The image labelled ‘body” is the AE of image – NOT the AE of a ‘body feeling emotion/feeling.

So the AE of “emotion/feeling” is thought and what the thought “emotion/feeling” is about is content and is pure story.

Is this clear?

What exactly is it that is “feeling a little confusion here”?

Not thoughts/sensations.. also, a question : is there anything else like thoughts/sensations? It feels like there is more than just thoughts and sensations. In the article about direct experience, it says that there is an "unmistakeable sense of aliveness"

You are still wanting the Cinderella (Sadhu) fairy tale of getting Prince Charming (enlightenment) and living happily ever after in a state of perfect peace, holiness and bliss.

What exactly is it that can or wants to ‘experience’ an “unmistakeable sense of aliveness”?

How is it known that there is “more than just thoughts and sensations”? (Actually there is…there is also smell, images, taste and sound).

What is the AE of “aliveness”?

AE of confusion is feeling.

NO. There is no such thing as a “feeling”.
The AE of “confusion” is thought. The content of the label “confusion” is a story

What exactly is it that is “feeling”?
Can a thought “feel”?
Can a sensation “feel”?
Can an image “feel”?
Can a sound “feel”?
Can a taste “feel”?
Can a smell “feel”?

What exactly is it that has a ‘head’?
What is the AE of ‘head’?

Not thoughts/sensations.
Image.

So when you LOOK at the “head” there is a thought (labelled ‘head) + sensation that seems to point to a ‘head’ + image of a so-called ‘head’.

Images, sensations and thoughts know nothing of a ‘head’.
So the AE of a ‘head’ is the AE of thought and NOT the AE of a ‘head’. What the label ‘head’ is pointing to (referring to) is a story.

Is this clear?

Love Kay