Requesting a guide to help finish it off

[asmaha]

Those (things) under my control would be.. *sigh* - can’t think of any!

That's a sigh of regret I suppose? Couldn't it as well be a sigh of relief? :-)

Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear?

I didn’t do anything to decide which thoughts to appear. Despite the sense that I picked them; I didn’t. They were never ‘chosen’ among other thoughts, or they were not ‘thought to be thought about’ so to speak. I never did choose any of my thoughts.

Yes!
I suppose that what you've written right before:

Yes, I sense that I can chose thoughts. That I can push certain thoughts away. That I can allow some thoughts. I can choose to think of a car, of my wife, of my brother, of the teacup in front of me. Of a friend.

is ruled out then? Just to make sure.

Could you have done anything to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead?

A part of me wants to say yes, but I know this is not true. I have never experienced a moment where I chose between 2 or more different thoughts. Another thought may appear after an initial one, but “I” can never chose which the new thought will be.

That is interesting, as I really believed that I could decide future thoughts.

Yes! Good observation.

Where are thoughts coming from?

From ‘the inside’, from a speculated brain, but all I really discover is ‘void’ if words were to describe. Emptyness; not even that. They appear, that’s all I can ever know. “I” can never know where thoughts come from.

Yes!

They appear; they disappear, that’s all I can ever achieve direct experience of, with regards to thoughts. Nothing else can be known.

Good.

Can you predict your next thought?

- no, that’s impossible for me.

Yes, great. Isn't that funny? That you never know which thought is going to appear next, and yet normally there is this believe that "you" are doing, controlling, creating thought?

Can you push away any thought?

- Well, they can be pushed away, but it’s not done by any ‘me’. They’re just pushed away; when that’s what happens to them.

Alright.

The “I” that can control things… it’s not made of anything, it’s an internal sense of “I”-ness, and it’s connected, or tied, to other internal things like thoughts, intentions and percieved actions. It’s tied to it, but it’s not sensed that it controls anything. The “I” sense is invisible. I can’t find that it’s made of anything. It's like a thought - it comes and goes. It flickers.

Let's take a closer look on what is meant by "direct experience".
All that is ever experienced is: sight, sound, (bodily/tactile) sensation, smell, taste and thought. There is nothing here besides that. Do you agree? Or can you find anything else? ("Feelings" might be another candidate, but when you look closely you will find that a feeling consists of bodily sensations that are labeled by thoughts).
By asking you what this sense of I-ness you are talking about was "made of" in your direct experience, I meant to ask: Is it a sensation? A thought? A sound? A combination of two or more elements of experience, like sensation + thought for example?
So, with this cleared, take a fresh look and try to get a hold of this sense of "I". Is it really there? If so, what is it "made of"? Try to describe it as detailed as possible.

Consciousness is just the place where it all takes place. There’s no information going in and out of awareness. Awareness doesn’t have any content or information that is separate from sensations. It doesn’t interact with thoughts, feelings, emotions, sensations, actions. The sense of “I” doesn’t control or create anything.

The idea of "consciousness" can become a subtle placeholder for the self. Please investigate, what consciousness/awareness is in your direct experience. Can this thing really be found, that "doesn't interact with thoughts, feelings, emotions, sensations, actions"? Or is this awareness just a concept, an idea, and in reality there are simply thoughts, feelings, actions etc.?

[Azov]

Yes!
I suppose that what you've written right before:

Azov wrote:
Yes, I sense that I can chose thoughts. That I can push certain thoughts away. That I can allow some thoughts. I can choose to think of a car, of my wife, of my brother, of the teacup in front of me. Of a friend.

is ruled out then? Just to make sure.

Yes, that's ruled out. I can't "choose" any of those mental object - they're just being served up. Or "appearing". I tried checking in again, and I can't find any way to make a choice about what's next to emerge. And "I" can't choose what to submerge, either. It just happens.

I read a meditation teacher who said all we can ever "do" is to set intentions again and again - that that's the only thing "we" have control over (in meditation as well as in life). But really - when investigating - I don't find any "me" that does the setting of those intentions. That just happens. The intention is set - and "I" become aware of it just after the fact.

Yes, great. Isn't that funny? That you never know which thought is going to appear next, and yet normally there is this believe that "you" are doing, controlling, creating thought?

Very much agree. We could really be in a state of constant surprise. The same goes for all the other sensations which just "pop up" inside totally unannounced all of the time. Shocking :)

All that is ever experienced is: sight, sound, (bodily/tactile) sensation, smell, taste and thought. There is nothing here besides that. Do you agree?

I do agree. I've been wondering about "moods" or "states", but investigating it, though + sensations seems to fit well enough. For practical purposes, those match up: for example, "I" feels to me to be a thought mostly, and also some sensation in there, some tactile sensation, of "presence" or something of the like. It feels liks it's centered somewhere in the upper-middle of my head, or in the upper-middle of my conscious inner space, rather. Definitely has a lot of 'thought' quality to it. Lol - it feels pretty "thin" or elusive in terms of "being found" - feels so bogus - considering the humongous impact it's hade on my whole life, it should be easier to detect and pin down, right? Well, it's not. It's thin, bordering on transparent/non-existing, definitely has thought quality to it, sensations... yeah, tactile. It's really hard to describe, this "I" sense. I hope I'm doing this correctly.

The idea of "consciousness" can become a subtle placeholder for the self. Please investigate, what consciousness/awareness is in your direct experience. is this awareness just a concept, an idea, and in reality there are simply thoughts, feelings, actions etc.?

Umm... that's a good question! I'll get back to it later, today. It's really hard to get a good idea of what consciousness "is", that's for sure. I like that you challenge that notion!

[Azov]

Azov wrote:
Consciousness is just the place where it all takes place. There’s no information going in and out of awareness. Awareness doesn’t have any content or information that is separate from sensations. It doesn’t interact with thoughts, feelings, emotions, sensations, actions. The sense of “I” doesn’t control or create anything.

The idea of "consciousness" can become a subtle placeholder for the self. Please investigate, what consciousness/awareness is in your direct experience. Can this thing really be found, that "doesn't interact with thoughts, feelings, emotions, sensations, actions"? Or is this awareness just a concept, an idea, and in reality there are simply thoughts, feelings, actions etc.?

Uhm well, I don't know if it makes sense, but here it seems that awareness/consciousness itself doesn't have any direct experience features. It's just "there" or "not there", depending on how you look at it. It feels like it's the capacity for things to arise in/from, rather that a direct experience "object".

[asmaha]

Yes, that's ruled out. I can't "choose" any of those mental object - they're just being served up. Or "appearing". I tried checking in again, and I can't find any way to make a choice about what's next to emerge. And "I" can't choose what to submerge, either. It just happens.

I read a meditation teacher who said all we can ever "do" is to set intentions again and again - that that's the only thing "we" have control over (in meditation as well as in life). But really - when investigating - I don't find any "me" that does the setting of those intentions. That just happens. The intention is set - and "I" become aware of it just after the fact.

Great. To see this with such clarity is already a profound realisation!

Very much agree. We could really be in a state of constant surprise. The same goes for all the other sensations which just "pop up" inside totally unannounced all of the time. Shocking :)

:-)

"I" feels to me to be a thought mostly, and also some sensation in there, some tactile sensation, of "presence" or something of the like.

Is "presence" a sensation or a thought?
A sensation would be something like tingling, aching, itching, pulsating, vibrating... Or a sensation of temperature, of weight or of texture.
Does the sense of "I" you experience have any of those kind of qualities?

And then... Is this sense of "I" the "I" - or is it simply a sensation, not different from any other sensation?

Lol - it feels pretty "thin" or elusive in terms of "being found" - feels so bogus - considering the humongous impact it's hade on my whole life, it should be easier to detect and pin down, right?

Yes it should be, shouldn't it? It should be the most obvious thing, right? I mean, we are talking about YOU! You really shouldn't have any problems finding YOURSELF, right?
...Unless there maybe just is no "you"?

It's really hard to describe, this "I" sense. I hope I'm doing this correctly.

You're doing really fine :-)

Uhm well, I don't know if it makes sense, but here it seems that awareness/consciousness itself doesn't have any direct experience features. It's just "there" or "not there", depending on how you look at it.

Yes. So that means it is not there in your direct experience, except in the form of a concept, right?

It feels like it's the capacity for things to arise in/from, rather that a direct experience "object".

So we could say that "consciousness" is just a word that describes the simple fact that experience is happening?
(I just want to make sure that you don't nurse one of those spiritual concepts about awareness being some kind of entity, an invisible observer in the background watching its objects or something like that.)

[Azov]

Working on a lengthy report I'll post tomorrow! Just wanted to give a sign of life.

[asmaha]

Alright, read you tomorrow then!

[Azov]

Azov wrote:Yes, that's ruled out. I can't "choose" any of those mental object - they're just being served up. Or "appearing". I tried checking in again, and I can't find any way to make a choice about what's next to emerge. And "I" can't choose what to submerge, either. It just happens.

I read a meditation teacher who said all we can ever "do" is to set intentions again and again - that that's the only thing "we" have control over (in meditation as well as in life). But really - when investigating - I don't find any "me" that does the setting of those intentions. That just happens. The intention is set - and "I" become aware of it just after the fact.

Great. To see this with such clarity is already a profound realisation!

Yes, well, although it’s a realisation, it seems to be more of a cognitive revelation than an emotional one. I accept it when I discover it in the moment, then there’s a silent sense of “but i’m not sure it’s always like this” or “it might not be true tomorrow”. So there’s doubt, here! Some part of me is afraid of taking the step to fully accept and acknowledge the discoveries we’re making.

One a side-note: I have felt very much more relaxed this week, more and more, since we started this conversation. Not sure exactly how this process does that, but it feels like the relaxation and openness is related to this inquiry.

Azov wrote:"I" feels to me to be a thought mostly, and also some sensation in there, some tactile sensation, of "presence" or something of the like.

Is "presence" a sensation or a thought?
A sensation would be something like tingling, aching, itching, pulsating, vibrating... Or a sensation of temperature, of weight or of texture.
Does the sense of "I" you experience have any of those kind of qualities?

Oh wow, that’s interesting to investigate. Yeah, it does feel like “I” has a bit of weight to it, and a soft, smooth surface texture, of a subtle kind. Oval kind of shaped. Investigating the experience, I have no idea why I would attach any idea or thought of “self” or “I” to these sensations - but the association sure is there, strange. There’s much more to the full conscious experience that is inside, so it’s very odd that this subtle sensation cluster would have anything to do with any “I” or “real self”. It’s just a sense. A cluster of sensations. It’s a sort of “center” sense. Nothing real about it, except its mental existence.

And then... Is this sense of "I" the "I" - or is it simply a sensation, not different from any other sensation?

Oh, this is the tough question! A part of me really don’t want to go there. A part of me is super excited and eager; ready. “Yes!” is the immidiate and obvious answer! There’s no difference!! It’s a sensation just like all others inside - just a tiny bit different in flavour - but it’s the fucking same as everything else in experience - there’s really nothing out of the ordinary about it. It’s just the same as everything else in there. It’s all the same; it’s all different kinds of sensations. And another part won’t let that idea land emotionally, it’s like it’s numb to it.

Azov wrote:Lol - it feels pretty "thin" or elusive in terms of "being found" - feels so bogus - considering the humongous impact it's hade on my whole life, it should be easier to detect and pin down, right?

Yes it should be, shouldn't it? It should be the most obvious thing, right? I mean, we are talking about YOU! You really shouldn't have any problems finding YOURSELF, right?
...Unless there maybe just is no "you"?

Well, like I said, the more we talk about it, the more I feel that the “I” we’re looking for has so very little to do with who “I” REALLY AM - since “the I” is so hard to define, find, to pin down or describe. Shouldn’t something so central be a lot more easy to identify, describe and so on? The experience right now is that there is a whole hell of a lot of other things going on inside consciousness which has nothing at all to do with any “me” or “I” sense. That’s totally unrelated and unconnected to that. Thoughts, emotions, sensations, actions - they are happening without neccessary intercommunication with any “I” sense.

Azov wrote: Uhm well, I don't know if it makes sense, but here it seems that awareness/consciousness itself doesn't have any direct experience features. It's just "there" or "not there", depending on how you look at it.

Yes. So that means it is not there in your direct experience, except in the form of a concept, right?

Umm well no, I wouldn’t say that, because it definitely feels that there’s something “THERE”, It’s just intangible. Like an object always “just out of view” no matter where you look - it’s always “kinda” there - but you can’t grasp it, or zoom in on it - or define it - but it’s a sensation, or maybe not a “sensation” sensation, but it sure feels like something’s there. You get what I mean. It doesn’t feel like awareness/consciousness has got anything to do with who “I” am or not, though. Feels like it’s some other kind of experience or thing.

Azov wrote: It feels like it's the capacity for things to arise in/from, rather that a direct experience "object".

So we could say that "consciousness" is just a word that describes the simple fact that experience is happening?
(I just want to make sure that you don't nurse one of those spiritual concepts about awareness being some kind of entity, an invisible observer in the background watching its objects or something like that.

To be honest, I do experience that consciousness (or rather, awareness), is a kind of “place” or at least an invisible/intangible “field” of sorts; in/from/out of which sensations arise as well as pass. Simmering. And at the same time totally still. You get this? I don’t nurture any sense that awareness watches or observes.

However, now that you mention it, I wonder, “who” is it that observes/experiences/examines the qualities and content of awareness? Attention can shift object and thereby switch content = switch what’s “in” attention at any given moment… but “who” is watching the center of that attention? Who is watching that? Who or what is watching/observing sensations? Who is investigating? Who is the receiver, if any?

There’s experiencing, for sure, but who or what is “experiencing”, “focusing” or “attending”.....??? Nothing/no one is DOING the experience, or the experiencing, that feels certain. It just happens on its own. Gets constructed outside of consciousness. But what’s experiencing the experience, so to speak?

If anything?

Experience seems to be just experienced. Or experiencing - like a verb, if you will. It seems to just be happening, the overwhelming majority of it. Once again, I feel like I'm hesitant to emotionally accept the full implications of this. I sniff it, so I suspect there is some fear hidden somewhere around here; which makes me go hesitant, or passive, with regards to accepting the discoveries fully savouring them and letting them unfold further. I'd like some help or pointers on how to handle that.

[asmaha]

Yes, well, although it’s a realisation, it seems to be more of a cognitive revelation than an emotional one. I accept it when I discover it in the moment, then there’s a silent sense of “but i’m not sure it’s always like this” or “it might not be true tomorrow”. So there’s doubt, here! Some part of me is afraid of taking the step to fully accept and acknowledge the discoveries we’re making.

Don't worry. We will continue this investigation until everything is really clear. Let the doubts be there if they arise - and just check again and again how things really ARE. Keep observing this from time to time during your daily activities: Is there anything/anybody directing the movements of this body? Or are the movements just happening? Is there anything creating or controlling thought? Or are thoughts simly appearing and disappearing? Don't try to think this through, just keep LOOKING. Don't expect any grandiose realisations, just humbly and minutely look at reality as it is, in this moment.

Once again, I feel like I'm hesitant to emotionally accept the full implications of this. I sniff it, so I suspect there is some fear hidden somewhere around here; which makes me go hesitant, or passive, with regards to accepting the discoveries fully savouring them and letting them unfold further. I'd like some help or pointers on how to handle that.

When you clearly see that there is no "you" who could fully accept or not accept something, that there is no "you" to get anywhere, all these discoveries will fall into place. Until then, there will probably be the sense of "I'm not really there".
When there is fear coming up, talk to it. If it could speak, what would it say? What does it want to protect you from?

Yeah, it does feel like “I” has a bit of weight to it, and a soft, smooth surface texture, of a subtle kind. Oval kind of shaped. It’s a sort of “center” sense. Nothing real about it, except its mental existence.

With "sensation" I actually mean REAL SENSUAL experience. What you are describing is, as you rightly state, something that exist only MENTALLY.
Try the following for clarification of what direct experience means.
Touch some objects within your reach. The computer, the table, a cup, whatever. Concentrate on just sensing how the different surfaces feel. Some are more smooth, some more rough. They have a certain temperature.
When you lift the objects you can feel their weight.
Feel all those qualities, all those sensations. See how these sensations are not dependant on labelling thoughts or mental images? They are simply and directly experienced.
Then feel the body. Focus successively on some of the arising sensations: The hands resting on the thighs. Breath moving the chest. The feel of your feet on the ground. Stay with each sensation for a while and really savour it. Thoughts may arise and label the sensations ("warmth", "tightness", "hunger" etc.). Do you see how these labels can never capture that what they are pointing to? That the label "warmth" is something completely different from the actual experience of warmth? The experience itself is utterly simple - it just is - and yet completely indescribable. Do you see how these sensations too are not dependant on labelling thoughts or mental images?
They are real, in the sense that they don't depend on you imagining them or believing in them to be there.
Now imagine something, for example an oval shaped form with a smooth surface in the middle of your chest. Make it vivid. "Feel" it. What do you really feel? And what is just mental imagery?
So, coming back to what you wrote: Is there any sensation of a "center"? Or is "center" just a thought, a mental image?
Please do the same investigation with the other senses.
Look around you. See the things that are really there. See the richness and complexity of colors and forms.
This experience of seeing doesn't depend on your imagination to occur - it's simply there, right?
Now close your eyes and imagine sights. Try for example to imagine the same sights that you just saw. Notice the difference to the real experience. It's immense, isn't it?
Try the same for hearing, smelling and tasting. Experience the actual sensual experience first, and than imagine a simililar experience.
The first experience is the direct experience of what is really here. The second experience is the direct experience of thought. Thought itself is also really here, but the contents of thought are fictional. They exist exclusively in the mental realm.
While some thoughts can point to real experience (like the thoughts "cold", "blue", "soft", "loud", "sensation", "smell", "thought" for example), most thoughts just point to other thought content.
Can you see that?

Let's first get this thing straight, after that we will return to the question of consciousness.

[Azov]

Keep observing this from time to time during your daily activities: Is there anything/anybody directing the movements of this body? Or are the movements just happening? Is there anything creating or controlling thought? Or are thoughts simly appearing and disappearing? Don't try to think this through, just keep LOOKING.

I’ll make an effort to do this in daily life, I have the feeling more time spent investigating would really be helpful!

When there is fear coming up, talk to it. If it could speak, what would it say? What does it want to protect you from?

Right now, there is fear of seeing thorugh the illusion of an “I” completely. There is fear of falling apart, a fear of desintegrating, collapsing or segregating mentally. A fear that internal senses and thoughts wouldn’t be “tied together” the way they interact with each other now. There’s a fear of losing/letting go of control, that things would somehow turn out bad for me and writing this I realise instead that it wouldn’t make much or any difference at all and if it should in some case be “bad”, the potential for control is always there to “turn on” if need be. So this basically means I CAN relax more and more into “being”-ness or “self-lessness” or whatever name we pick. Hmm.

I’ll try to let the fear talk when it show’s up!

With "sensation" I actually mean REAL SENSUAL experience. What you are describing is, as you rightly state, something that exist only MENTALLY.

But why separate the two sensate spheres?

I already know that the self only exist mentally - that it’s a made up idea, a though-belief.

Do you see how these labels can never capture that what they are pointing to? That the label "warmth" is something completely different from the actual experience of warmth?

Yeah, totally.

Now imagine something, for example an oval shaped form with a smooth surface in the middle of your chest. Make it vivid. "Feel" it. What do you really feel? And what is just mental imagery?

My experience is that i can sense that shape tactile-wise as I imagine it. I can also “see it” internally, in my minds eye so to speak, so I experience it as both mental imagery and as touch/tactile sensation.

So, coming back to what you wrote: Is there any sensation of a "center"? Or is "center" just a thought, a mental image?

Yeah, there are “real”, physical sensations. Although, why I connect them to a sense of “I” eludes me. Its part mental imagery, too. Even if there is sensations that are tied to a sense of “I”, that doen’t mean that the “me” exists, except as a mental figment or mental experience. That doesn’t make it any less “real” though for me, since the existence of a sensation and the existence of another sensations are equally real. Nothing exists for us unless it has the form of a sensation in awareness. Whether the sensations corresponds to anything out in the “external world”, we can in a sense never know. In this way I don’t distinguish between “real” or “unreal” sensations, so to speak. “Internal existence” is fine by me, too.

Now close your eyes and imagine sights. Try for example to imagine the same sights that you just saw. Notice the difference to the real experience. It's immense, isn't it?

Well, it’s magnitudes more richer and fuller in terms of sensation density, but as I see it, there is no difference in “realness” between imaginary and sensory information/sensations, since all sensations are imaginary, in the sense that they just exist inside consciousness, as just that - sensations.

The first experience is the direct experience of what is really here. The second experience is the direct experience of thought. Thought itself is also really here, but the contents of thought are fictional. They exist exclusively in the mental realm.

Where in lies the importance of separating “real” from “illusory”/“imaginary” sensations here in our context, in this discussion?


If I interpret your question to be “are your sensations of “I”-ness imaginary or real”, I have to examine real hard to be able to tell a difference. They feel “real” to me actually. To be honest, I’m now wondering if they’re just some touch/pressure sensations from my forehead or something. Or another analogy - it’s like when you have a headache, it’s those kind of sensations. To call them real or imaginary? It’s like its both. Neither, or something in between.

(I might be skipping ahead here; but to me, the real question is: why do “I” think these sensations have anything to do with my sense of “I” or separate “I”? - I might continue on this trail also if I get time later today).


Thank you for your specificity and accuracy in probing my statements!

[asmaha]

Right now, there is fear of seeing thorugh the illusion of an “I” completely. There is fear of falling apart, a fear of desintegrating, collapsing or segregating mentally. A fear that internal senses and thoughts wouldn’t be “tied together” the way they interact with each other now. There’s a fear of losing/letting go of control, that things would somehow turn out bad for me and writing this I realise instead that it wouldn’t make much or any difference at all and if it should in some case be “bad”, the potential for control is always there to “turn on” if need be. So this basically means I CAN relax more and more into “being”-ness or “self-lessness” or whatever name we pick. Hmm.

Yes, relax if you can. But see also that "self-lessness" is not a certain state. It's just a fact of existence, it's just the way that things are already! There already is no control and nobody who could let go of it. So there is no need to fear that with seeing through the illusion "you" would lose control or fall apart.

I’ll try to let the fear talk when it show’s up!

Good, let me know if that happens.

With "sensation" I actually mean REAL SENSUAL experience. What you are describing is, as you rightly state, something that exist only MENTALLY.

But why separate the two sensate spheres?

I already know that the self only exist mentally - that it’s a made up idea, a though-belief.

This is not about knowing intellectually or believing that the self is an illusion. It is about seeing it directly, here and now.
Being able to very clearly distuingish between things that exist only in the realm of thought and things that are "really here" is absolutly elementary for this seeing.
That is why I am insisting on seperating those spheres

If I interpret your question to be “are your sensations of “I”-ness imaginary or real”, I have to examine real hard to be able to tell a difference. They feel “real” to me actually.

That was not what I intended to ask. What I wanted to know was: Which parts of this I-sense are bodily sensations and which parts are thoughts/mental images?

Even if there is sensations that are tied to a sense of “I”, that doen’t mean that the “me” exists, except as a mental figment or mental experience. That doesn’t make it any less “real” though for me, since the existence of a sensation and the existence of another sensations are equally real. Nothing exists for us unless it has the form of a sensation in awareness. Whether the sensations corresponds to anything out in the “external world”, we can in a sense never know. In this way I don’t distinguish between “real” or “unreal” sensations, so to speak. “Internal existence” is fine by me, too.

I think there may be a misunderstanding here, maybe because of my writing REAL SENSUAL in capital letters. What I wanted to emphasize with this is the sensuality, not the "realness" in any abstract philosophical way (as in "correspondance to an external world"). I wanted to make clear that what I mean by "bodily sensation" is the actual experience of touch and of bodily sensations. Not the imagined experience of touch or bodily sensation.
What I mean by saying that the experience of thought is "real", but the content of thought is "imaginary", is the following: When you are thirsty, the thought "water" doesn't quench your thirst. If you visualize water in your mind, that's not going to quench your thirst either. The thought-label "water" or the mental image of water are simply something else than the direct experience of drinking "real" water.
You can't live in the thought "house" and you can't ride on your mental image of a bycicle.
Do you see that?

Here's an exercise that I would like you to try as many times throughout the day as you can. Label each experience simply image/colour, sound, smell, taste, sensation or thought.

So as you become aware of:
Seeing a tree, simply = image/colour
Smelling the coffee = smell,
Feel the wind on your face = sensation.
Tasting the toothpaste on your toothbrush = taste
Hearing a car drive by = sound
Thought about work = thought. (Thoughts can be words and mental images)

Just break down all experiences into these categories (which are all actual experience) and report back how you go.

I might be skipping ahead here; but to me, the real question is: why do “I” think these sensations have anything to do with my sense of “I” or separate “I”?

Of course, the real question here is "is there a self"? But trust me, gaining real clarity about the difference between direct experience and thought content is the best thing you can do in order to find an answer here.
But yes, look again - are these sensations which thought labels "sense of I" the self? Do these sensations do all those things that the self is supposed to be doing? Seeing, hearing, thinking, controling, deciding, feeling etc.?

[Azov]

Being able to very clearly distuingish between things that exist only in the realm of thought and things that are "really here" is absolutly elementary for this seeing.
That is why I am insisting on seperating those spheres.

I think I understand what you mean now. For example, being able to separate “seeing”, “hearing”, “touch”, and “mind”, for example.

That was not what I intended to ask. What I wanted to know was: Which parts of this I-sense are bodily sensations and which parts are thoughts/mental images?

Oh - then, it’s both. Mental images are fewer, and I can dispel those. Bodily sensations are significantly more, and more heavily identified with, too.

I wanted to make clear that what I mean by "bodily sensation" is the actual experience of touch and of bodily sensations. Not the imagined experience of touch or bodily sensation.

If I read you correctly, the “imagined experience of touch” would be for example having a thought or a mental image of being touched.

The thought-label "water" or the mental image of water are simply something else than the direct experience of drinking "real" water.
You can't live in the thought "house" and you can't ride on your mental image of a bycicle.
Do you see that?

Yeah, I think what happend is that I mixed up the label “imaginary” and “real” as meaning something completely different from what I understand you mean by them now. Sorry about that - I re-read your last previous posts now too and they make sense, now.

[Azov]

And to come back to this one, too:

So, coming back to what you wrote: Is there any sensation of a "center"? Or is "center" just a thought, a mental image?

For sure, it's a sensate thing. There's strong sensations of that.

[Azov]

Of course, the real question here is "is there a self"? But trust me, gaining real clarity about the difference between direct experience and thought content is the best thing you can do in order to find an answer here.
But yes, look again - are these sensations which thought labels "sense of I" the self? Do these sensations do all those things that the self is supposed to be doing? Seeing, hearing, thinking, controling, deciding, feeling etc.?

Well, no, they don’t. They feel like heavy, pressure sensations, but they don’t do anything. It’s funny, cause they just “sit” there, immobile, and I connect those sensations to a sense of “I”, of “existing”, more precisely. It’s not experienced that they “do” something - they’re connected more to a feeling of “aliveness”, of “me” “being”. They’re very separate from seeing, thinking, feeling, controlling, deciding, actually.

[Azov]

Glad we're back from the forum maintenance period!

I didn't have access to the posts during the period. Did inquire today about that "physical" sense of self or how to put it -

But yes, look again - are these sensations which thought labels "sense of I" the self? Do these sensations do all those things that the self is supposed to be doing? Seeing, hearing, thinking, controling, deciding, feeling etc.?

No! The sensations does nothing, at all. I believe they're tied to a sense of "self" or separate, private existance because they are always present. It seems I can always tune into them. So it's a case of "guilty by association". Nothing "I" about them, it's just that they are often/always present.

Hope you've been well over the weekend.

[asmaha]

Glad we're back from the forum maintenance period!

Yes!

Hope you've been well over the weekend.

I have, thanks :-)

But yes, look again - are these sensations which thought labels "sense of I" the self? Do these sensations do all those things that the self is supposed to be doing? Seeing, hearing, thinking, controling, deciding, feeling etc.?

No! The sensations does nothing, at all.(...) Nothing "I" about them, it's just that they are often/always present.

Yes, nice discovery! Just sensations, with nothing "I" about them.

It’s funny, cause they just “sit” there, immobile, and I connect those sensations to a sense of “I”, of “existing”, more precisely. It’s not experienced that they “do” something - they’re connected more to a feeling of “aliveness”, of “me” “being”.

Yes, what if those sensations are just what it feels like to be alive - with no "me", with nothing "I" about it?
So, what is this "I" that connects these sensations to a sense of "I"?

I believe the sensations are tied to a sense of "self" or separate, private existance because they are always present. It seems I can always tune into them.

And what is this "I" that can always tune into them? LOOK! What is really there?

And to come back to this one, too:

So, coming back to what you wrote: Is there any sensation of a "center"? Or is "center" just a thought, a mental image?

For sure, it's a sensate thing. There's strong sensations of that.

Please describe in detail what make the sensations you are experiencing into "sensations of a center".


I gather from what you write that the difference between "imaginary" and "real" (that is thought-content and direct experience) is becoming clearer - nice.
Did you do this exercise? If so, how did it go?

Here's an exercise that I would like you to try as many times throughout the day as you can. Label each experience simply image/colour, sound, smell, taste, sensation or thought.

So as you become aware of:
Seeing a tree, simply = image/colour
Smelling the coffee = smell,
Feel the wind on your face = sensation.
Tasting the toothpaste on your toothbrush = taste
Hearing a car drive by = sound
Thought about work = thought. (Thoughts can be words and mental images)

Just break down all experiences into these categories (which are all actual experience) and report back how you go.

Best, J.