Looking for a guide to make me see the truth

[Sadhu]

Hey Kay!

So while reading through your reply, i realized something. The self, and everything that holds and glues the self together, is just thought. I was thinking that the self is holding itself, that it is glued by something. And i realized it is glued by thought. And thought isn't real. Thought can't glue anything, it can't do anything, it's just a thought.

What exactly is it that will “get it”?

Haha, this is so funny. Nothing. I think i can actually kinda see what you mean now, and it's funny. Thoughts and senses can't get anything.

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?

Thinking is a thought.
Thinker of thoughts isn't anything. It can't sense anything and it can't think, thoughts just are, they have no beginning or end.
The label seeing is the AE of thought, and the sensation labelled "seeing" is the AE of sensation.. same for hearing/smelling. And there is no seer/smeller/hearer. I used the example you gave me with "expectation". All of this is much harder to see than the question before.

Is this clear?

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

Yeah.
Nothing is seeing. Thought/senses can't see.
Thought? There's a label on the sensation of seeing.

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

Not thoughts/senses.. nowhere.

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?

Not thoughts/senses. Just a thought.

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?

Kinda..

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”?

Not thoughts/senses. So nothing.

Well, thoughts/senses can't know anything.. (though i read it in "Direct experience" article, haha)

Thought ?

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”?

Nothing..
Nope, nope and nope..

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?

Yeah.

Love,
Sadhu

[forgetmenot]

Hello Sadhu! :)

So while reading through your reply, i realized something. The self, and everything that holds and glues the self together, is just thought. I was thinking that the self is holding itself, that it is glued by something. And i realized it is glued by thought. And thought isn't real. Thought can't glue anything, it can't do anything, it's just a thought

.

Yes, thought + belief in being a body + belief in time and cause & effect (subject/object split) is what holds the belief of being a ‘separate individual’ together.

What exactly is it that will “get it”?

Haha, this is so funny. Nothing. I think i can actually kinda see what you mean now, and it's funny. Thoughts and senses can't get anything.

Yes, and what (already) IS, knows ITSELF

Thinking is a thought.
Thinker of thoughts isn't anything. It can't sense anything and it can't think, thoughts just are, they have no beginning or end.

Yes because there is NO thinker of thoughts at all – in any shape or form.

Is this clear?

The label seeing is the AE of thought, and the sensation labelled "seeing" is the AE of sensation.. same for hearing/smelling. And there is no seer/smeller/hearer. I used the example you gave me with "expectation". All of this is much harder to see than the question before.

The more you ‘look’ the clearer it becomes.

Nothing is seeing. Thought/senses can't see.
Thought? There's a label on the sensation of seeing.

We will explore/investigate the body after ‘thoughts’ are seen through clearly.

What is the AE of “aliveness”?

Well, thoughts/senses can't know anything.. (though i read it in "Direct experience" article, haha)
Thought ?

Yes, the label “aliveness” is the AE of thought and not the AE of “feeling aliveness”.
The sensation labelled “aliveness” is the AE of sensation and NOT the AE of “aliveness”.

What exactly is it that ‘glues’ the sensation labelled “aliveness” and the label “aliveness” together and calls it an ‘experience’ of “aliveness”?

And what exactly is ‘experiencing’ this “aliveness”?

Describe to me what “aliveness” is. What does “aliveness” ‘do’?
What does it look like?
Where is it located?
What does it taste like, smell like, sound like?
Describe the sensation “aliveness” in detail.

Okay the following might help in distinguishing between what thought says and what is actual experience.

When you look at the word label ‘GREEN’, what is the actual experience?
Is the red colour ‘experienced’ or is green colour ‘experienced’ as the label suggests?
Do the labels have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’?
Or do the labels suggest something else other than what is here now (red colour)?
Is green-ness inherent attributes of the ‘experience’ of the red colour, or green is just a word label on the experience of the red colour?

If the label ‘GREEN’ is replaced with the label ‘GOOD’ or ‘BAD’, is the redness affected in any way as the labels suggests?
Does redness become ‘good’ or ‘bad’ or the labels have no effect whatsoever on ‘reality’?

Love Kay

[Sadhu]

Hey Kay :)

So i've actually noticed something throughout the day (i do mahasi nothing throughout the day, since it's my day-to-day practice, and it goes really nicely with looking). When i feel a sensation, for example in my stomach, i notice the sensation itself, and the mind getting active, starting to label it, like "pain in the stomach" or "tingling in the stomach". Also, my mind has been constantly forgetting the word "sensation" for the past 4-5 hours, as if it doesn't want me to notice sensations. And yea, i know there isn't anything that doesn't want, just sharing, haha.

Yes because there is NO thinker of thoughts at all – in any shape or form.

Is this clear?

Yup.

The more you ‘look’ the clearer it becomes.

Yeah, it became a little easier to notice the difference between the mind labelling things, and the actual experience.

Yes, the label “aliveness” is the AE of thought and not the AE of “feeling aliveness”.
The sensation labelled “aliveness” is the AE of sensation and NOT the AE of “aliveness”.

What exactly is it that ‘glues’ the sensation labelled “aliveness” and the label “aliveness” together and calls it an ‘experience’ of “aliveness”?

And what exactly is ‘experiencing’ this “aliveness”?

Describe to me what “aliveness” is. What does “aliveness” ‘do’?
What does it look like?
Where is it located?
What does it taste like, smell like, sound like?
Describe the sensation “aliveness” in detail.

Thought! It's the thought that glues them together.

"Aliveness" is a label on some specific sensation, so a thought. The sensation itself doesn't do anything, it's not thought or senses, it just gets experienced. It's funny how there is no-one to experience aliveness, but the sensation still happens.

It doesn't look like anything. A thought can't look like anything, neither can senses.
It isn't located anywhere, same as above.
It tastes like sweet, sweet chocolate. Nah, just joking, it can't taste like anything.
Sensation labelled "aliveness"? Well it's just a sensation, there isn't anything to describe. If i tried describing it, nothing would come out of it. Anything i think of, that should "describe it", would be a thought.

When you look at the word label ‘GREEN’, what is the actual experience?
Is the red colour ‘experienced’ or is green colour ‘experienced’ as the label suggests?
Do the labels have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’?
Or do the labels suggest something else other than what is here now (red colour)?
Is green-ness inherent attributes of the ‘experience’ of the red colour, or green is just a word label on the experience of the red colour?

If the label ‘GREEN’ is replaced with the label ‘GOOD’ or ‘BAD’, is the redness affected in any way as the labels suggests?
Does redness become ‘good’ or ‘bad’ or the labels have no effect whatsoever on ‘reality’?

Haha, when i first tried this exercise, it seemed confusing. Then i went to sleep, and now after 10 hours, it doesn't seem so complex. The actual experience is of seeing, and there is experience of red, but if i read it carefully, thoughts pop up with the color green, which is a thought.
They don't. Holy moly, our thoughts, that we thought are helping us see reality how it is, are just making it worse, haha. Oh well, what can thoughts know about all of this anyway. Now i clearly understand what you meant with thoughts are pure fiction.
And yea, they suggest more.
It's not attributes of the experience of red, it's just a label.

No, it's not affected in any way.
Nope, red is still red. No matter what word it is, red is still red.

Love,
Sudha :)

[forgetmenot]

Dear wonderful Sudha :)

What exactly is it that ‘glues’ the sensation labelled “aliveness” and the label “aliveness” together and calls it an ‘experience’ of “aliveness”?

Thought! It's the thought that glues them together.

Yes! :)

"Aliveness" is a label on some specific sensation, so a thought. The sensation itself doesn't do anything, it's not thought or senses, it just gets experienced.

It doesn’t get ‘experienced’. There is no separate entity/person that is ‘experiencing’ or has ‘experienced’ anything – it is experience itself.

Is this clear?

Look carefully at this and report back.

It's funny how there is no-one to experience aliveness, but the sensation still happens.

Is there any actual experience of a ‘person’ feeling *sensation (aliveness)*?
Or is there just *sensation (aliveness)*?
It's that simple.
‘You’ (not the ‘person’ labelled Sadhu) ARE that *sensation (aliveness)*
You are not feeling it.

When you look at the word label ‘GREEN’, what is the actual experience?

Holy moly, our thoughts, that we thought are helping us see reality how it is, are just making it worse, haha. Oh well, what can thoughts know about all of this anyway. Now i clearly understand what you meant with thoughts are pure fiction.

Thoughts themselves are not pure fiction. Thoughts are actual experience. What thoughts are ABOUT is pure fiction.

There is a distinction here……can you see this? Is this clear?

It's not attributes of the experience of red, it's just a label.
No, it's not affected in any way.
Nope, red is still red. No matter what word it is, red is still red.

Yes exactly. Words are just pointing, but words are never what they are saying.
If so, the word "breathing" would be moving right now.

So, this is clear?


Okay, let’s try another exercise!

If you were in a desert, dying of thirst, could you quench your thirst just by thinking about water (thoughts) or would you need to drink ‘real’ water?

Let’s say I’m with you in the desert and offer you two options:

(1) In my left hand there is a piece of paper with the word ‘water’ written on it, and
(2) in my right hand there is a bottle of water.

Which one would you choose to quench your thirst, the label or the water?

So, can the label ‘water’, which is actual experience (AE) of thought, quench your thirst?

Labels are ‘real’ (AE) as appearing thoughts (like the word ‘water’ on the piece of paper) but its ‘content’, what the thought is ABOUT (the story ABOUT water) is not ‘real’ and is NOT the AE of ‘water’ (content).

Can you see this?

Is this clear?

Love Kay :)

[Sadhu]

Hey Kay ! :D

It doesn’t get ‘experienced’. There is no separate entity/person that is ‘experiencing’ or has ‘experienced’ anything – it is experience itself.

Is this clear?

Look carefully at this and report back.

Haha, yeah, now it makes a little more sense. We are the experience, just as you said. That's like another piece of the puzzle. Reminded me of Bruce Lee's famous quote about water :D We are like flowing experience, constantly changing experience.

Is there any actual experience of a ‘person’ feeling *sensation (aliveness)*?
Or is there just *sensation (aliveness)*?
It's that simple.
‘You’ (not the ‘person’ labelled Sadhu) ARE that *sensation (aliveness)*
You are not feeling it.

Yup :D

Thoughts themselves are not pure fiction. Thoughts are actual experience. What thoughts are ABOUT is pure fiction.

There is a distinction here……can you see this? Is this clear?

Sorry, didn't make myself clear there, haha. Yeah, i can see that the content of the thoughts is fiction, but the thoughts are. I meant it in a way that words make up all these stories about reality, while the reality is just really simple. Just like the red word "Green". It's in reality just red, while the thoughts say "green", even though in reality its in red color. The thoughts are there, real, but the contents - "green" isn't.

Yes exactly. Words are just pointing, but words are never what they are saying.
If so, the word "breathing" would be moving right now.

So, this is clear?

Yeah, this is clear. Like if we say eating, it's just a pointer that something is eating, the word can't eat.

If you were in a desert, dying of thirst, could you quench your thirst just by thinking about water (thoughts) or would you need to drink ‘real’ water?

Let’s say I’m with you in the desert and offer you two options:

(1) In my left hand there is a piece of paper with the word ‘water’ written on it, and
(2) in my right hand there is a bottle of water.

Which one would you choose to quench your thirst, the label or the water?

So, can the label ‘water’, which is actual experience (AE) of thought, quench your thirst?

Labels are ‘real’ (AE) as appearing thoughts (like the word ‘water’ on the piece of paper) but its ‘content’, what the thought is ABOUT (the story ABOUT water) is not ‘real’ and is NOT the AE of ‘water’ (content).

Can you see this?

Is this clear?

The real water of course. Yeah, i see it now. The paper is our thought, and what is written on it is the content of the thought. The paper is real, but the word on it, is not. Any word can be on it, for example "drowning" but in reality we wouldn't be drowning. The paper is still real though.

Love,
Sudha

[forgetmenot]

Hey Sadhu!

If you were in a desert, dying of thirst, could you quench your thirst just by thinking about water (thoughts) or would you need to drink ‘real’ water?

Let’s say I’m with you in the desert and offer you two options:

(1) In my left hand there is a piece of paper with the word ‘water’ written on it, and
(2) in my right hand there is a bottle of water.

Which one would you choose to quench your thirst, the label or the water?

So, can the label ‘water’, which is actual experience (AE) of thought, quench your thirst?

Labels are ‘real’ (AE) as appearing thoughts (like the word ‘water’ on the piece of paper) but its ‘content’, what the thought is ABOUT (the story ABOUT water) is not ‘real’ and is NOT the AE of ‘water’ (content).

The real water of course. Yeah, i see it now. The paper is our thought, and what is written on it is the content of the thought. The paper is real, but the word on it, is not. Any word can be on it, for example "drowning" but in reality we wouldn't be drowning. The paper is still real though.

Hmmm…take another look.

The word ‘water’ is the thought – not the paper. You can equate the paper to the ‘mind’!

What is the AE of paper?
What is the AE of ‘mind’?

The label/thought is actual experience, so the label ‘WATER’ is AE of thought and also AE of image in this case.

The label/thought ‘paper’ is AE of thought but NOT AE of paper
The label/thought ‘drowning’ is AE of thought but NOT AE of drowning.

If you were to run your hands under a tap of water, what is the actual experience?

There is sensation labelled 'cool' but that is AE of sensation NOT AE of water
There is another sensation labelled 'wet' but that is AE of sensation NOT AE of water
There is sound labelled 'splashing' but that is AE of sound NOT AE of water
There is sound labelled 'running water' but that is AE of sound NOT AE of water
There is an image of 'hands under a running tap of water' but that is AE of image NOT AE of water
There are labels 'hands', 'tap', 'water' but they are AE of thought NOT AE of water
There is a smell labelled 'water' but that is AE of smell NOT AE of water
There is a taste labelled 'water' but that is AE of taste NOT AE of water

So what's the AE of water?


Is this clear?

Love Kay

[forgetmenot]

If you were to write the word 'paper' on a piece of paper, which of these is actual experience?

Love Kay

[Sadhu]

Hey Kay ! :)

So i was taking a shower today, and i was thinking and looking at "water". I realised, that there is no "water". "Water" is really a label/thought that glues together sensation and image (and smell/taste, depending on circumstances). So there isn't really anything. No "table", which is only the image and sensation (when touching) glued together by thought.

Hmmm…take another look.

The word ‘water’ is the thought – not the paper. You can equate the paper to the ‘mind’!

What is the AE of paper?
What is the AE of ‘mind’?

They are both labels.

So what's the AE of water?

"Water" is just a thought that glues together sensations. AE of thought.

If you were to write the word 'paper' on a piece of paper, which of these is actual experience?

Well, the actual piece of paper would be an AE of image, and sensation (if i'm touching it), the word written on the piece of paper would be AE of image, and the content of the word written would be a thought.

Love Sudha :)

[Sadhu]

They are both labels.

They are both thoughts that are labels, just making it more clear, haha.

[forgetmenot]

Hello Sadhu!

Wonderful looking! :)

So i was taking a shower today, and i was thinking and looking at "water". I realised, that there is no "water". "Water" is really a label/thought that glues together sensation and image (and smell/taste, depending on circumstances). So there isn't really anything. No "table", which is only the image and sensation (when touching) glued together by thought.

Yes!
Water = label + sensation
Table = label + sensation

If there is no separate individual, how then is there a separate anything!?

And since it is thought that glues it together, what is it that divides experience into pieces labelled as ‘sensation’, ‘thought’, ‘image’, ‘smell’, ‘taste’ and ‘sound’?

What is the AE of paper?
What is the AE of ‘mind’?

They are both labels.

Yes, they are AE of label/thought + AE of image, sensation and so on. But ‘paper’ and ‘mind’ cannot be found anywhere.

Is that clear?

If you were to write the word 'paper' on a piece of paper, which of these is actual experience?

Well, the actual piece of paper would be an AE of image, and sensation (if i'm touching it), the word written on the piece of paper would be AE of image, and the content of the word written would be a thought.

I don’t understand what do you mean when you say “the content of the word written would be a thought”? Could you explain it to me please.


So let’s try another exercise.

Close your eyes

Imagine holding a watermelon in your hands.
Imagine it so vividly that you can feel its weight, the shape and texture of the skin.
Hold it there, sensing it.

Then open your eyes.

What happened to the melon?
How about the sensation that was so believable?
Was there ever a melon in ‘reality’?
Was there an appearing mental image?
Was the content of the mental image (the melon) ‘real’?
The thoughts and mental images are real only as appearing thoughts and mental images, their ‘presence’ cannot be denied. However their ‘content’, what are they about (like the watermelon) are not ‘real’, they are just fantasies.

Can you see this?

Love Yak 

[Sadhu]

Hey Yak! :) (Misspelled? Now we both have misspelled nicknames, yay.)

And since it is thought that glues it together, what is it that divides experience into pieces labelled as ‘sensation’, ‘thought’, ‘image’, ‘smell’, ‘taste’ and ‘sound’?

Thought again?


On the other hand, thought cannot divide or do anything, neither can the senses.. sooo, nothing is divided?

Yes, they are AE of label/thought + AE of image, sensation and so on. But ‘paper’ and ‘mind’ cannot be found anywhere.

Is that clear?

Yup.

I don’t understand what do you mean when you say “the content of the word written would be a thought”? Could you explain it to me please.

Haha, sure. I meant that the word that we read in our mind, will be the actual experience of thought. So for example if there was a paper with the word "water" written on it. The paper is real, the word (the thing that is written with a pen on the paper) is real, but the "water" that we read isn't, it's just a thought. So metaphorically, the paper is the mind (which is real), the word that is written with the pen that we can see is the thought (which is real), and the "water" that we read from the word on the paper is not. It is just in our thoughts.

Close your eyes

Imagine holding a watermelon in your hands.
Imagine it so vividly that you can feel its weight, the shape and texture of the skin.
Hold it there, sensing it.

Then open your eyes.

What happened to the melon?
How about the sensation that was so believable?
Was there ever a melon in ‘reality’?
Was there an appearing mental image?
Was the content of the mental image (the melon) ‘real’?
The thoughts and mental images are real only as appearing thoughts and mental images, their ‘presence’ cannot be denied. However their ‘content’, what are they about (like the watermelon) are not ‘real’, they are just fantasies.

Can you see this?

Nothing happened, it's just a thought.
The sensation wasn't real, it's just a thought, or remembering of a sensation that really happened before, which is still a thought.
Nope.
Yup.
Nope.
That's the word i was looking for! "Presence"! The presence is real, the content is not. Haha, you really nailed that word perfectly. Also, i really love these exercises, they help a lot.

Love Sudha :)

[forgetmenot]

Dear Sadhu,

Hey Yak! :) (Misspelled? Now we both have misspelled nicknames, yay.)

Deliberately misspelled…..having some fun! :)

And since it is thought that glues it together, what is it that divides experience into pieces labelled as ‘sensation’, ‘thought’, ‘image’, ‘smell’, ‘taste’ and ‘sound’?

Thought again?

On the other hand, thought cannot divide or do anything, neither can the senses.. sooo, nothing is divided?

You are putting question marks on the end of your responses. Have a look, looking is what will give you your answers.

So let’s look!

What is the AE of ‘sensation’?
The AE of ‘sensation’ is a label that is put on ‘experience’. Is a ‘sensation’ describable? Describe ‘pain’, or ‘tingling’, or ‘warm and fuzzy’. You might say that ‘pain’ is made up of ‘aching’. Describe ‘aching’ or ‘throbbing’. If you were to meet someone who knew nothing about ‘sensations’, how would you describe pain, tingling or warm and fuzzy to them! They can’t be described. They are what IS and are labelled as ‘experience,’ and experience is indivisible.

So what is the AE of ‘smell’?
What is the AE of ‘thought’?
What is the AE of ‘taste’?
What is the AE of ‘image’?
What is the AE of ‘sound?

I don’t understand what do you mean when you say “the content of the word written would be a thought”? Could you explain it to me please.

Haha, sure. I meant that the word that we read in our mind, will be the actual experience of thought. So for example if there was a paper with the word "water" written on it. The paper is real, the word (the thing that is written with a pen on the paper) is real, but the "water" that we read isn't, it's just a thought. So metaphorically, the paper is the mind (which is real), the word that is written with the pen that we can see is the thought (which is real), and the "water" that we read from the word on the paper is not. It is just in our thoughts.

There is NO SUCH THING AS A MIND, and it is no more real than the ‘separate individual’.
You keep using language that only keeps these ideas in place. There is no ‘our’ or ‘our mind’. Since there is no separate individual how can there be ‘others’ or ‘others with minds”?

Thoughts/labels appear as AE of experience, so they are known. Actual experience is what is known and what is known is thought, smell, sensation, image, taste and sound, everything else is STORY/FICTION. Whether the thought/label ‘water’ is ‘mentally’ thought or written on a piece of paper and is ‘seen as an image’, it is still AE of thought! (+ AE of image as it is also ‘seen’). Everything that is written here now, and everything that you write in response to questions are thoughts and are AE of thought – they are known. The meaning/content of the thoughts is not REAL.

Is this clear?

Where exactly is a ‘mind’ located?
What does a ‘mind’ look like?
What is the AE of a ‘mind’?

How is it known that the ‘paper’ is ‘real’?
What is the AE of paper?
How is the AE of water any different to the AE of paper?

There is an assumption that the water that is imagined (mental image) it is not real and the water that is showered in is real. Neither are real…there is no difference between a mental image of water or water in the shower…both are images. It is only thought that says you can ‘feel’ the water in the shower - then the water must be real. (But that is AE of sensation, NOT of water).

How is it known that there is a ‘body’ in the ‘shower’?

You may see an arm and see a leg or hands and feet, but how is it known that they are attached to a ‘body’?

What exactly is showering?

What is the AE of showering?

What exactly is ‘feeling’ the sensation of showering?

What is the AE of water?
Sensation, thought, taste, smell, sound and images know nothing about water…so what is the AE of water? THERE IS NO AE OF WATER – THERE IS ONLY AE OF THOUGHT + SENSATION.

Is this clear?

The sensation wasn't real, it's just a thought, or remembering of a sensation that really happened before, which is still a thought.

Yes, it is still a thought which is appearing as AE of thought.
Memory is a belief in time and there is no such thing as the past, present or future. This will be something we will look at later.

That's the word i was looking for! "Presence"! The presence is real, the content is not. Haha, you really nailed that word perfectly. Also, i really love these exercises, they help a lot.

Yes, their ‘presence’ is real because they are appearing as AE of thought and mental images. But a SEEMING watermelon that is bought from a shop is no more ‘real’ than the watermelon that was imagined. Both are AE of an image.

Is this clear?

Love Kay

[Sadhu]

Hey Kay! :)

You are putting question marks on the end of your responses. Have a look, looking is what will give you your answers.

So let’s look!

What is the AE of ‘sensation’?
The AE of ‘sensation’ is a label that is put on ‘experience’. Is a ‘sensation’ describable? Describe ‘pain’, or ‘tingling’, or ‘warm and fuzzy’. You might say that ‘pain’ is made up of ‘aching’. Describe ‘aching’ or ‘throbbing’. If you were to meet someone who knew nothing about ‘sensations’, how would you describe pain, tingling or warm and fuzzy to them! They can’t be described. They are what IS and are labelled as ‘experience,’ and experience is indivisible.

So what is the AE of ‘smell’?
What is the AE of ‘thought’?
What is the AE of ‘taste’?
What is the AE of ‘image’?
What is the AE of ‘sound?

Haha, yeah. It was obvious they are labels, i don't know why i was unsure. It's so simple.

Those are all labels of experience. Everything that exists is pretty much labels on experience.. wow.

There is NO SUCH THING AS A MIND, and it is no more real than the ‘separate individual’.
You keep using language that only keeps these ideas in place. There is no ‘our’ or ‘our mind’. Since there is no separate individual how can there be ‘others’ or ‘others with minds”?

Got it. :)

Thoughts/labels appear as AE of experience, so they are known. Actual experience is what is known and what is known is thought, smell, sensation, image, taste and sound, everything else is STORY/FICTION. Whether the thought/label ‘water’ is ‘mentally’ thought or written on a piece of paper and is ‘seen as an image’, it is still AE of thought! (+ AE of image as it is also ‘seen’). Everything that is written here now, and everything that you write in response to questions are thoughts and are AE of thought – they are known. The meaning/content of the thoughts is not REAL.

Is this clear?

Yes.

Where exactly is a ‘mind’ located?
What does a ‘mind’ look like?
What is the AE of a ‘mind’?

How is it known that the ‘paper’ is ‘real’?
What is the AE of paper?
How is the AE of water any different to the AE of paper?

Something that doesn't exist can't be located.
Or have a look.
Thought.

The thought/label 'paper' is just that, a label. It is real, but it is not 'paper', nothing is paper, since the label 'paper' is used to describe some specific sensations.. it is just a thought. The image of the 'paper' is real. The sensations that make up the label 'paper' are real. For example if the 'paper' is touched, the sensation is real. But the idea of the 'paper' is not, even though the thought is, the presence of the thought is real.

It isn't different. It's the same sensations.

How is it known that there is a ‘body’ in the ‘shower’?

You may see an arm and see a leg or hands and feet, but how is it known that they are attached to a ‘body’?

What exactly is showering?

What is the AE of showering?

What exactly is ‘feeling’ the sensation of showering?

What is the AE of water?
Sensation, thought, taste, smell, sound and images know nothing about water…so what is the AE of water? THERE IS NO AE OF WATER – THERE IS ONLY AE OF THOUGHT + SENSATION.

Is this clear?

There is no 'shower' or 'body', it is just thoughts that glue sensations together and label them.

Thought again. 'Body' is a label..

Nothing. Thought/senses can't shower.

Thought. 'Showering' is a thought. The senses that make up the label 'showering' are image, sound and sensation. So, showering is pretty much a label on experience.

Got it.

Yes, it is still a thought which is appearing as AE of thought.
Memory is a belief in time and there is no such thing as the past, present or future. This will be something we will look at later.

Yay.

Yes, their ‘presence’ is real because they are appearing as AE of thought and mental images. But a SEEMING watermelon that is bought from a shop is no more ‘real’ than the watermelon that was imagined. Both are AE of an image.

Is this clear?

Yup!

Love, Sudha :)

[forgetmenot]

Hey Sadhu! :)

Haha, yeah. It was obvious they are labels, i don't know why i was unsure. It's so simple.
Those are all labels of experience. Everything that exists is pretty much labels on experience.. wow.

Yes…..BINGO!

All experience is, is thoughtthought,smellsmell,sensationsensation,tastetaste,soundsound,colourcolour. Everything else is a story that is married to experience by thought.

The thought/label 'paper' is just that, a label. It is real, but it is not 'paper', nothing is paper, since the label 'paper' is used to describe some specific sensations.. it is just a thought. The image of the 'paper' is real. The sensations that make up the label 'paper' are real. For example if the 'paper' is touched, the sensation is real. But the idea of the 'paper' is not, even though the thought is, the presence of the thought is real.

It isn't different. It's the same sensations.

Yes, nice! :)

Okay here is an exercise on control and choice!

1. First, choose one of your arms - It doesn't matter which.

2. When you have done that, rest for a moment and then when you want to, raise that arm into the air.

Don't go to thoughts, examine the actual experience. Do this as many times as you like, and each time inquire…

What is it exactly that is choosing which arm to raise?
Can you find a separate individual or anything that is doing the choosing?
What is it that is controlling the arm?
Can a controlling ‘thing’ be located?
Can anything be found that makes the arm move?
How is the decision made?

Do this exercise as often as possible throughout the day and report back.

Can you please highlight EACH QUESTION with the quote function. I know its easier to bunch a whole heap together and answer them from there...but it makes reading the answers difficult. I am all for simplicity and its simpler to read the highlighted question and the answer underneath it.

Love Kay

[Sadhu]

Hey Kay ! :)

What is it exactly that is choosing which arm to raise?

Nothing..

Can you find a separate individual or anything that is doing the choosing?

There are thoughts about it, but ultimately nothing does the choosing.

What is it that is controlling the arm?

Nothing.

Can a controlling ‘thing’ be located?

No, there isn't anything that can be located, it just happens by itself.

Can anything be found that makes the arm move?

No.

How is the decision made?

There is no decision, it just flows by itself.

Can you please highlight EACH QUESTION with the quote function. I know its easier to bunch a whole heap together and answer them from there...but it makes reading the answers difficult. I am all for simplicity and its simpler to read the highlighted question and the answer underneath it.

Haha, alright, no problem!

Love Sudha :)