How can there not be a self?

[Dutchman]

Good morning Gerhard,

Please find an environment that’s not too noisy. Sit down and pay attention to a sound. Please observe the following.
- Where does sound end and the listener begin?
- Is it possible to put a credit card in the gap between the sound and the listener?
- Can the listener be found? Or is there just sound?

Please do the same with thoughts as well. Find some time and space to watch and observe thinking again:
- Where exactly does a thought end and the one experiencing thought begin?
- Can a thinker be found?

Please do the same with sensations as well. Find some time and space to watch and observe sensations. This might be easier with your eyes closed.
- Where exactly does sensation end and the one experiencing sensation begin?
- Can someone separate from sensation be found?
(It might be easier to do each one of the exercises above at different times so that you ca n look carefully at each.)

I found three opportunities to do the above. In different settings, different times. Here are some of my observations.

As long as I don't attach to the thought: "it must be me, thinking, hearing, feeling", I can honestly say that there is no way that I can tell who or what is listening, where listening is happening, where the feeling, sensation, thought come from, go to. It's only the thought that 'I am listening/feeling/thinking' that in any way determines there is a separate me doing all of that. Without that thought listening, feeling, thinking is simply happening. There doesn't seem to a boundary that I can identify where something happens and where something doesn't happen. Can't put your credit card in between anything as long as there are no 'two' present.

Now, that said, this is my experience on a very small scale. When I try the above experiments/exercises, that's what I found. However, on a more constant basis (like in daily life), that is not my experience. Then I am navigating 'JW' as a separate entity who has to do, think, listen. Is that your experience also?

Like I said before, I feel I need to 'practice' this more. Just to become more aware and comfortable with this experience.

I am on my way to the dentist... Perfect place to experience the drilling, noise, feelings... JW

[gerhard_pret]

Hi JW,

Good to hear form you. Some excellent looking going on :-)

Then I am navigating 'JW' as a separate entity who has to do, think, listen.

Please look at the following and report back:

- Where is this navigator exactly? Can you find him? Where is it's location?
- What is it?
- How do you know when it's there or not?

Best Wishes

Gerhard

[Dutchman]

Good evening Gerhard,

Please look at the following and report back:

- Where is this navigator exactly? Can you find him? Where is it's location?
- What is it?
- How do you know when it's there or not?

This is a tough one for me. I've eluded to this before. Somehow when I need to navigate a car or plane, there is this belief (and, I agree that that is what it is) that a person/entity, some amalgam of bones, feelings, learned behavior, etc., is 'in control'. Who else is managing the controls?

I struggle here. Whereas it was somewhat easy for me to conclude that hearing, feeling, thinking was just happening without being able to identify or locate a 'self', when it comes to locating the 'navigator', I have to be honest and say to you that there is nothing but 'me' who's doing that. I look and see hands, feet operating the controls. I don't see some magic fairy who does it.

I hesitate calling what I observe as a self. I see some entity. Do I identify with this entity? Yes I do. It's my direct experience although there is no difference between this entity that I experience and the chair that is 'experienced' across from the room. Except that the chair is not driving the car, flying the plane.

Gerhard, I tried various times today (when I was doing different things) to find the navigator. I cannot get past the fact (?) that this entity, fueled/driven by whatever, is the navigator. Beyond that it would all be beliefs or guesses.

Best, JW

PS The one caveat here is that, again, 'me' cannot be isolated as a separate 'thing'. This entity doesn't stop outside my skin. That is the only 'crack' in me seeing a single, 'alone', separate navigator...

[gerhard_pret]

Hi JW,

Somehow when I need to navigate a car or plane, there is this belief (and, I agree that that is what it is) that a person/entity, some amalgam of bones, feelings, learned behavior, etc., is 'in control'. Who else is managing the controls?

OK, lets have a closer look at this. If there is a 'me' or 'I' in control of the experience called "flying the plane", or "making coffee", you should be able to find or locate it. Lets see if we can locate an I / 'Controller' / navigator that has any more reality than a magic fairy :-)

Lets take this one first.

I look and see hands, feet operating the controls. I don't see some magic fairy who does it.

Yes, no one is denying that flying as an activity or proces is happening, or that an organism with things labeled hands and feet are involved, or that the thinking needed for flying doesn't arise. But is it personal? Is there a 'person' doing all of this? Or is both the plane and the organism inside both equally 'empty' of a personal 'self'?

(We can use some of the exercises you previously did as a basis for this first one. You mentioned wanting more practice with this kind of looking so lets apply it here.)

Please have a close look at some other activity (i.e making coffee, typing on the computer, another activity in daily life etc.)

- While carrying out this activity please tell me if you can find anything in experience other than seeing, sensing / feeling, hearing, smelling, tasting, thinking. Please describe what you find.
- Can the seer be found? or is there just the seen? Can you find a 'controller' / navigator in the seeing?
- Can the listener be found? Or is there just sound? Can you find a 'controller' / navigator in the hearing?
- Can the feeler be found? Or just the sensation / feeling? Can you find a 'controller' / navigator in the feeling?
- Do this with each sense please.

You've previously noticed how the mind labels things it focuses on. Notice what the mind does during the activity you chose while you are doing it. Please describe what you notice. When observing your actions in this way is there any evidence, in any part of direct experience explored above, for the presence of an "I". For example: When the mind labels the behaviour or actions "I'm moving," or I'm seeing, check your experience. In your experience, can you find the "seeing" or the "moving" that the thought refers to? What about the "I"? What in experience does the "I" point to. Can a personal "I" be located in experience. You mentioned the fairy before. How does the evidence weigh up? Could you locate any more evidence for the presence of an "I" than for the fairy?

Now, you said that some combination of feelings or learned behaviour might make up the I / 'controller'. If this is the case you should be able to find it in these. Lets take 'feelings'.

Could you say a bit more about these feelings you mentioned? What are they, where are they? What does a feeling consist of (Does it consist of sensation or thought? etc.). Do you control them, or do they come and go as they please? Is there anything in the experience of the feeling other than feeling? Can you find a "I" there? Can a feeling do anything other than appear in experience when it appears and disappear when it disappears? How exactly does a feeling control or do anything? What's the relationship between feelings and actions?

Once you had a chance to do the above please start to investigate "learned behaviour"? What is this? What makes learned behaviour different from other behaviours? What in experience distinguishes learned behaviour from other behaviours? Behaviours (in the form of actions) can often be found in experience, but what in experience does the 'learned' part of the concept refer to? Please report back what you find.

Best Wishes

Gerhard

[Dutchman]

Good morning Gerhard,

Need a bit more time to give this my proper attention. I will get back to you tomorrow (Monday) or Tue at the latest, ok?

Thank you. JW

[gerhard_pret]

Great, thanks for letting me know :-)

Best wishes,

Gerhard

[Dutchman]

My “I’ll talk to you on Mon or Tue” wasn’t entirely honest. Here’s the truth.

I am angry (which may suggest you’re onto something by pushing me to look at the existence of a self. See later.)
At some level, my anger seems driven by the illogical reasoning I am experiencing by non-dualists. To ask to find a self in and of itself may be the wrong question. It’s like asking to show you an empty space or air. The fact that you can’t point at it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Y’all seem to happily jump on the bandwagon and conclude that “Oh, because I can’t point at it, it must mean it doesn’t exist.” Maybe the question is wrong? ‘Them’ Catholics ‘see’ miracles happen and through a very rigorous process of ‘looking’ and evaluating they conclude that Joe Pope XXX indeed deserves beatification and is suddenly well on his way to canonization and public veneration. Hooray, we have ourselves a new angel. And, all them Catholics now ‘see’ the new angel sitting on his pink cloud, sipping his favorite divine alcoholic beverage. (With apologies for maybe being offensive to all ‘them Catholics’.)

But you get my drift, I hope. I can’t see ‘miracles’ either. Nor that Johnny Pope did it. What is a miracle anyway? But, clearly 1 billion people see it and are absolutely convinced that there is such a thing.

You agreed with me that the car is being driven and the plane is being flown. In some manner, this is happening. There is a car, an engine, etc., that is being made to do things. We can agree on that, right? We can also agree, I hope, that there is a body with arms and legs, manipulating the controls. And, yes, that body has acquired and stored some learned behavior, otherwise it couldn’t possible drive that car. The car certainly does not possess that learned behavior; it can’t drive the driver, so to speak.

Is that body-plus-stuff a separate self? Who knows? You can’t tell me it isn’t. I can’t tell you it is. I have agreed with you that this body sitting in that car is, in and of itself, no different from the car or the tree it’s about to hit. But it must possess something that makes this car move.

When I make coffee, there is a process happening of making coffee. Certain steps to make that happen. How is that done?, who does it?, you ask. Can we agree that neither you nor I know the answer to the question? And, turning the question around, can you tell me with all the certainty you seem to have that there is no self, that that is true? How true is it, really, that there is no self? Can you prove to me that there is no such thing?
When a person dies, something is gone. I’ve looked at bodies in caskets and had to conclude that there was only one thing missing. I don’t care what you call that ‘one thing’ but its absence causes that body to lay in the casket, not being able to get up, talk.

So far, the more agitated, angry side of JW. Here’s the softer, more feminine side of SELF…  (I just know you are going to ask me to find them for you.)

The fact that I am clearly agitated may suggest we’re onto something and that, maybe, my carefully constructed ‘world of self’ is slowly disintegrating. And all the above bullshit is just that, bullshit. Sheer attempts to avoid to look. (You just know that if you make that argument, I am going to ask you to show me the bullshit, right? Just kidding.) But, I am open to accept that I find ways to avoid this looking, for whatever reason.

When I looked to find a self when I was listening to music I agreed that I couldn’t tell you where the music started, ended, who was listening, etc. When I drive the car, I cannot make that same claim. When I make coffee, ditto.

So, please don’t give up on me, but I have to get past this.

Thanks for your patience. JW

[gerhard_pret]

Hi JW,

I appreciate your honesty.

I am angry

That's fine.

To ask to find a self in and of itself may be the wrong question. It’s like asking to show you an empty space or air.

Maybe. if we use air as an analogy then you are right that even though we might have little direct experience we would notice certain effects when it's present or absent. 'Space' is interesting one, and it's not something that we usually investigate in depth on LU at this stage. Our primary question at the moment is the question of a personal self. I guess one could say that we often start this journey of looking into the self with quite a strong belief that certain of the experiences we have is evidence for its presence. In essence the belief "I am (insert action / characteristic etc)" co-opts lots of experiences. It claims many things. Each of these claims are often assumed to support its case that it is really important! I guess that with your example or 'air' it would be hard to point to 'air'. The only experience we have of it is through various sensations (mostly tactile), and the dramatic effect it has when it's absent (our body stops functioning). In this case the concept air IS important. Is is one of many interdependent factors that keep our body functioning. However, the concept 'air' does not claim to be anything beyond what it is. Does it make claims like "Air is in charge!"etc.?

I guess what we are investigating here is what this "I" is that seems to have become the center of many people's lives?

So .... back to the statement I made previously about pointing to what is not there. We are not looking for new beliefs ie. "I" DON'T EXIST. In the case of the 'self' it makes many claims. It claims to be very, very important. But when you start to look for it things start to get interesting. It says things like "I am here...I am there...I am this...I am that...." It may claim to be the sum of all parts, or in some of the parts. It may even co-opt beliefs like "Just because you don't see me, doesn't mean I'm not there." Maybe,....but its also a bit like that monster we were afraid of underneath our beds when we were young. Our mind claims its underneath the bed, but also says that maybe its better not to check, just in case.....and just remember that if you don' find it doesn't mean that it wasn't there....it's probably just hiding.

If there was a 'navigator,' in charge of everything why would it be hiding? Keep looking with an open mind. Really look at the belief in the navigator (what the "I" seems to claim to be at the moment) and see if it is possible that it is just a belief.

I think what might be helpful for the time being would be not to just answer the questions I pose to you to guide your inquiry in definitive 'yes' or 'no' terms. Remember, we are exploring together. Maybe you could actually describe for me what you experience in the moment, while carrying out a simple task, like moving your hand or moving your harm, or maybe while making some coffee, typing on your computer etc . If you cannot carry out the task in front of the computer, making notes as you go, you could possibly keep some notes while doing it at another time. So, while doing the task, please describe in detail what you experience in terms of seeing, hearing, smelling, feeling, sensing, thinking. Maybe you could pick one of these activities where it feels the sense of self is strong. Describe this experience of self in as much detail as you can in the moment. :-)

Best Wishes

Gerhard

[Dutchman]

Whassup?

Thank you for your thoughtful response. Before I respond, let me update you a bit.

After I sent you my last missive, I talked to a good friend who, like you, is a guide, albeit not with LU. She and I have talked quite a bit over the years about all things non-duality, and she is following your and my discussion on the LU Forum.
As you know, my sticking point is this discussion about self/no-self. In a nutshell, I find the claim that there is no self just as troubling as the assertion that there is a self. I can get quite bogged down in that discussion. With her help I have concluded that I am ok not knowing the answer and that the discussion, actually, is probably quite moot since neither you nor I can prove anything.

Importantly, what is there before we even label anything? Regardless of there being a self/no-self, ‘it’ is happening, right? Listening is happening, feeling, thinking, etc., is happening. Again, I am clear that, especially when I close my eyes and listen to noise/music/whatever, I cannot tell, on present evidence, where the noise is coming from, where it is going, how/who/what is listening. That, in and of itself, is quite a realization.

Coming back to your suggestion:

So, … , please describe in detail what you experience in terms of seeing, hearing, smelling, feeling, sensing, thinking. Maybe you could pick one of these activities where it feels the sense of self is strong. Describe this experience of self in as much detail as you can in the moment.

I am sitting in the cockpit. Engine noise. Vibration. Hands on yoke, power, feet on pedals, touching. I notice the plane is not flying straight so I adjust the trim. It’s a feeling that you are flying sideways, confirmed by an instrument on the panel. I look at the instrument. After adjustment, I look at it again. A shadow flashing by makes me look outside, noticing a cloud. Some anxiety about flying through it. Importantly, I am keenly aware of sitting there, warm, maybe sweaty, looking at all the instruments when I think I hear something unusual. Constantly checking, adjusting. I have to admit that all those feelings, sensations are just sorta happening. Not sure where all those sensations come from, or go to, but they are ‘front and center’ and very much there. The sense of I/self, here, is very strong. Nobody but me is in charge of this plane. No one else but me is flying the plane. When something goes wrong, it’s me who has to act, recall emergency procedures. Yet, fear, anxiety, feelings, thinking is happening but I am not sure if all that is only localized in ‘me’. I am aware of them but cannot claim ownership. They come and go, seemingly at will.

Per my observation at the beginning, I feel like I am in never-never-land. Like in between. There is this sense of ‘I-and-only-I’ who is flying the plane but I am also aware that the sensations, feelings, thoughts, kinda pass through and I cannot seem to claim ownership.

That’s all for today.

As always, thanks for your help. JW

[gerhard_pret]

Hi JW,

Will write a full reply a bit later today. I apologize for the delay. Family and work required more time than usual in past days.

Best wishes,

Gerhard

[Dutchman]

No rush! All good. And, just a heads up: we'll be traveling this Sat and Sun. Just sayin' :)

JW

[gerhard_pret]

Hi JW,

Importantly, what is there before we even label anything? Regardless of there being a self/no-self, ‘it’ is happening, right? Listening is happening, feeling, thinking, etc., is happening.

Yes, exactly! Without the thoughts “I am breathing,” breathing still happens. Without the thought “I am listening,” listening still happens. The same for feeling, thinking etc. If this is the case, what’s the function of the “I am…/ I….” label? Would breathing, listening, thinking, feeling etc stop without it? Is this extra level of “I…” thought really needed?

Again, I am clear that, especially when I close my eyes and listen to noise/music/whatever, I cannot tell, on present evidence, where the noise is coming from, where it is going, how/who/what is listening. That, in and of itself, is quite a realization.

Maybe you could try doing the above ‘listening experiment’ again some time. Just notice, in the moment, as you notice the listening, when does the “I” thought come? Does the “I” thought come before the experience? Does it follow the experience? What’s first, the experience or the label? Once the “I” thought comes, what other thoughts / stories about the experience follows? Once the “I” thought/s are there, how does this change your experience compared to prior?

Thank you very much for your beautifully clear description of flying the plane! This kind of description is really helpful. It’s easier to see how ‘selfing’ as a process operates ‘in the moment’ when you write from your immediate experience. If you could continue to write or describe your experiences in this way that would be helpful.

Could you please try the following with an open mind? Choose an action / task like the one you described before (but keep it simple). Relax and look at it thoroughly and honestly “in the moment”. How did that action happen? For example (using your lovely description of flying):

noticing the plane is not flying straight (seeing) => remembering instructions from flight school (thoughts) => adjusting the trim (sensing / seeing?)

feeling of flying sideways (feeling) => look at instrument (seeing) => “Confirmed..” (thought)
checking (seeing?) = > adjusting (sensation / seeing?).

hearing sound (hearing)= > “That sounds unusual” (thought) = > checking (seeing?) = >adjusting (sensing / seeing) => feeling (labelled as anxiety?) = > recalling emergency procedures (thoughts) = > etc.

Did you, at any moment, out of the blue, decide you would do that action? What preceded that action (ie. a thought, feeling etc)? Were there any actions in that task that was not preceded by something else (like a thought, light on the dashboard etc.) in experience? Did you have any control over the event that triggered/ preceded the action? (i.e Did you control the readings on the instrument panel that then lead to your thought or action?) If the preceding event did not happen, would your action still have happened? In these circumstances could you really call that happening ‘your’ action?

While looking at this task / actions also please consider the following:

In this sequence of happenings, what exactly was the role of the “I….” thought? What was its function? Was it needed for all of these things to happen? Would anything not have happened in its absence?

I noticed in your description of flying the plane that as the description continued it seemed to contain more and more references to feelings (i.e anxiety). When this happened you also started referring more strongly to a sense of “I..”. Did the sense of “I” become more ‘sticky’ as the intensity of feelings increased? Is ‘I’ more of a thought or a feeling in this kind of situation? Maybe you could look out for this in the coming week.

(And just another quick reminder- Rather than just answering some of the suggested questions above in ‘yes’ or ‘no’ term, please be as descriptive as possible.)

Best Wishes and happy travelling!

Gerhard

[Dutchman]

Well now … The days fly by with little time left to respond to you. My apologies. Not sure I am playing by the LU rules, but I am doing my best.

Not writing does not mean I am not actively thinking about what you wrote, or, doing the looking you suggest. Indeed, your counsel is foremost on my mind throughout the day. (I know, I know, this sounds awfully much like one of my students telling me that the ‘dog ate my homework’.)

As I walk, drive, do stuff, I am keenly aware of the speed with which thoughts come in an ‘take over’. For example, I am walking on the beach and a flood of thoughts stream in (and out). Before I know it, I am actively involved in a debate with someone. The ‘contents’ of the thoughts seem to rule the day, so to speak. There are preciously few moments when the sand or water simply are observed without much attached to them. Or, a thought of someone or something that simply passes through without taking on its (assumed) meaning. Do you understand what I am trying to say? You wrote:

Just notice, in the moment, as you notice the listening, when does the “I” thought come? Does the “I” thought come before the experience? Does it follow the experience? What’s first, the experience or the label? Once the “I” thought comes, what other thoughts / stories about the experience follows? Once the “I” thought/s are there, how does this change your experience compared to prior?

Thus, as I indicate above, as soon as the I thought comes in, the entire experience gets influenced, colored, interpreted to mean something. Having observed this, I’ve tried to ‘un-Velcro’ (not my term) the meaning, feeling, thoughts from the contents of the experience. For example, the ocean is not beautiful, good, cold, but just ‘the ocean’. The pelicans don’t glide beautifully through the air, but are moving dots in space without any labels. The other day I was driving on a narrow road, competing with an oncoming truck for space. There was an immediate experience of anxiety but, somehow, I thought to notice the anxiety and not ‘take it on’ (i.e., ownership) but let it pass through as the truck narrowly rushed by.

Could you please try the following with an open mind? Choose an action / task like the one you described before (but keep it simple). Relax and look at it thoroughly and honestly “in the moment”. How did that action happen?

I do not know the answer to your question. How did it happen? Did I ‘will’ not attaching to the anxiety, or not labeling the pelicans or ocean as beautiful? I literally have no clue. I can say that the thought ‘I’ comes after the experience, and, thus, the experience must not happen to I but to something (or, whatever) before ‘I’ sets in. But, who or what that ‘before’ thing is, gawd only knows. It would be pure speculation as to answer (to use the proverbial question) “what was there before you were born?”

So, when you write:

Did you, at any moment, out of the blue, decide you would do that action? What preceded that action (ie. a thought, feeling etc)? Were there any actions in that task that was not preceded by something else (like a thought, light on the dashboard etc.) in experience? Did you have any control over the event that triggered/ preceded the action? (i.e Did you control the readings on the instrument panel that then lead to your thought or action?) If the preceding event did not happen, would your action still have happened? In these circumstances could you really call that happening ‘your’ action?

The ‘triggers’ are beyond my control, for sure. My reactions, how I execute things, take on stuff, … there seems to be something involved that only I (and not you) can claim any involvement in. You wrote:

In this sequence of happenings, what exactly was the role of the “I….” thought? What was its function? Was it needed for all of these things to happen? Would anything not have happened in its absence?

It would simply be pure speculation to say that in the absence of ‘I’ nothing would have happened. All i can agree on is that i don’t know. Does the tree that falls in the woods, when nobody is there, make a sound?, etc. What was my face before I was born? To be ‘realized’, I suppose; not to be guessed.

The above was written during the past few days. Today (Wed) I tried to look who was exercising. Who got up from his chair, put exercise clothes on, went to the exercise facility, huffed and puffed? This is where it always gets very mucky for me. Other than JW, I would not know who does it, where the thought (to exercise) came from, who got up. This entity schlepped his sorry ass over to the exercise place, so who other than I? You wrote:

Did the sense of “I” become more ‘sticky’ as the intensity of feelings increased? Is ‘I’ more of a thought or a feeling in this kind of situation? Maybe you could look out for this in the coming week.

Yes, the sense of I gets very sticky. Very sticky. That’s a good descriptor. As per above, stuff gets ‘velcroed’ on, but the question what does it get stuck onto … ?

Best, JW

[gerhard_pret]

Hi JW,

For example, I am walking on the beach and a flood of thoughts stream in (and out). Before I know it, I am actively involved in a debate with someone. The ‘contents’ of the thoughts seem to rule the day, so to speak.

Yes, that's what thoughts often do, they show up, whether we want them to or not. Sometimes there are lots, sometimes very few. Maybe you could experiment with just labelling them as 'thoughts' or 'thinking' when they do that, and just observe them coming and going? So, while looking at the ocean, your tablet, your phone when you notice thinking starting to comment on your experience maybe just label it ‘thinking’?

I can say that the thought ‘I’ comes after the experience, and, thus, the experience must not happen to I but to something (or, whatever) before ‘I’ sets in. But, who or what that ‘before’ thing is, gawd only knows

OK, so the ‘I’ comes after. It’s an add-on to experience, which then almost retrospectively colors our memory of experiences. So let’s take a closer look at what’s before. You said that the experience must happen to something before “I”. Let’s see what’s there ‘before’. Take a few moments’ to just relax. Just let things be for a couple of minutes. Maybe you could pick an object, or a sound etc that’s there right now. Observe it (like you observed the ocean or the seagulls.) Just stay with the experience of ‘seeing’ or ‘hearing’ even if it’s very brief. If thinking arises notice it for what it is, thinking, and juts gently move it to the side for a moment like you did with the seagulls and ocean. Now, what’s left? Have a look at what’s there before ‘I’ and various concepts are added to the seeing or the hearing? Please describe what’s there.

There was an immediate experience of anxiety but, somehow, I thought to notice the anxiety and not ‘take it on’ (i.e., ownership) but let it pass through as the truck narrowly rushed by.

Yes, like thoughts, feelings come and go. They show up whether we want them to or not. We might watch it arise and go like any other natural phenomenon (i.e the waves in the ocean.), or thoughts might arise labelling it “My feeling”. I’m interested in knowing what you experience was in this case. How was the experience different from a time where you might have ‘taken it on’? Is there anything inherently personal about a feeling when you don’t ‘take it on’ or label it “my (feeling)”?

This is where it always gets very mucky for me. Other than JW, I would not know who does it, where the thought (to exercise) came from, who got up. This entity schlepped his sorry ass over to the exercise place, so who other than I?

Yes, a collection of components (thoughts, limbs, feelings etc.) responded to thoughts about exercise by going to the exercise centre. That collection of components is generally labelled "JW" and not Gerhard. The set of body parts, organs, thoughts and feelings labelled Gerhard did not do these things. (Sorry for the awkward language used here.) You noticed previously when looking at the ocean and gulls etc. that “I” is sometimes a thought added after experience? So, when you said “Other than JW, I would not know who does it, ……who other than I?...,” is this any different from what happened when you watched the gulls or the ocean? Might thinking retrospectively be editing the story putting “I” at the centre?

Yes, the sense of I gets very sticky. Very sticky. That’s a good descriptor. As per above, stuff gets ‘velcroed’ on, but the question what does it get stuck onto … ?

I'll come back to the issues of 'stickiness'. Let's first address the above points.

Good to hear from you.

Best Wishes

Gerhard

[Dutchman]

Greetings,

Let’s see what’s there ‘before’. Take a few moments’ to just relax. Just let things be for a couple of minutes. Maybe you could pick an object, or a sound etc that’s there right now. Observe it (like you observed the ocean or the seagulls.) Just stay with the experience of ‘seeing’ or ‘hearing’ even if it’s very brief. If thinking arises notice it for what it is, thinking, and juts gently move it to the side for a moment like you did with the seagulls and ocean. Now, what’s left? Have a look at what’s there before ‘I’ and various concepts are added to the seeing or the hearing? Please describe what’s there.

I have done this exercise a thousand times, over, seemingly, as many years. There is nothing I can see or identify that is there before. All I can say is that the sound, feeling, thought was not there before (or after.) There are no words that can describe what was there before. How do you describe ‘not there’? The way I experience it is that a sound/thought appears and then goes away. Before or after the appearance, it’s simply not there. I cannot describe or name the ‘space’ that I feel is there where the sound or thought appears in; I can’t say what it is. For the lack of better words, it feels open to me, like an enormous empty something. I can’t identify with it, to be honest. Not sure what it is, if anything.

I’m interested in knowing what you experience was in this case. How was the experience different from a time where you might have ‘taken it on’? Is there anything inherently personal about a feeling when you don’t ‘take it on’ or label it “my (feeling)”?

It felt ‘cold’. Not attached to, or owned by, me. Rather neutral. This is a fairly new feeling or experience, I must admit. Will need more experience with it in order to properly account for the experience.

So, when you said “Other than JW, I would not know who does it, ……who other than I?...,” is this any different from what happened when you watched the gulls or the ocean? Might thinking retrospectively be editing the story putting “I” at the centre?

Yes, I fully agree there. It’s really interesting how quickly those thoughts creep back in, so to speak, and the speed with which you believe, not question, them.

Sorry to be brief today. Lots going on. I do have a request/question. I think I work best with simple, singular exercises. Maybe, if that’s ok with you, we can do this one step at a time? In other words, one exercise, one set of questions. It’s easier for me to go into more depth rather than trying to answer everything you raise. Is that possible?

Thanks and have a great day. JW

PS Tomorrow (Tue) we’re traveling home.