Request for a guide

[forgetmenot]

Hey Linda,

Put aside 10 minutes and sit with your eyes closed, and think of a story that brings up a sensation in the body. Then I want you to LOOK very very carefully with your eyes still closed to see if you can find/see an actual link between the thought and the sensation. If the sensation starts to dissipate, then bring the story to mind again and keep on looking to see if you can see/find a link. Do this exercise at least 3-4 time throughout your day, making sure you are looking very carefully.
Let me know what you find.

I did this a few times today. Sensation of tiredness, frustration and anxiety.Couldn't find any link between thought and sensation. Sensation is AE sensation and thought is AE of thought. Thought says it's such and such a sensation being experienced and thought tells it's stories about why sensation is there but there is no actual link. I remembered the exercise about the balancing scales, thought on one side and sensation on the other. It's impossible to look at them both at the same time.
Simply sit with sensation or watch thought, both cannot be looked at at the same time. Same outcome, it soon passes.

Terrific! So it is only another thought that links the thought with the sensation.

So let’s take this to the idea that sensation is coming from sight - the object seen. In this example, the object being the ‘hand’.

1. Close the eyes and hold up one hand. Pay attention only to the felt sensation ‘of the hand’.
2. Open the eyes, and now observe the hand by looking only.
3. While looking at the hand, pay attention to the felt sensations.

Repeat 1 to 3 as many times as needed and investigate…

Is there any link between the sensation and the sight, meaning that the sensation is ‘coming from’ the sight (labelled as ‘hand’) or only thought and mental constructs link them?

So if experience is appearing as sensation then there can only be the knowingknow as there in no separation. There is no known without the knowing of it. Can there be sensation without the knowing of it?

No. The experience sensation is known and knowing of sensation is knowing - knowingknown. There could not be sensation without the knowing of it.

Lovely, Linda. So is there an experiencer of experience?

If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there, does it still make a sound?

There would be no experience of it, no colour, no thought about a tree falling, no sound. It would not be known.

Haha, yes! How could it possibly be known that there is ever a forest!

Love, Kay

[Smudgestix]

So is there an experiencer of experience

There is no experiencer of experience. There is no knower of experience just knowing experience.

Is there any link between the sensation and the sight, meaning that the sensation is ‘coming from’ the sight (labelled as ‘hand’) or only thought and mental constructs link them

Eyes closed, there is only sensation, thought will say hand is being held up and a mental image, but if thought is ignored there is just experience of sensation.
Eyes open there is seeing of colour, thoughts label the colour 'hand' and thought will say that sensation is coming from the sight. If this was the case then no sensation would be felt when the eyes were closed. No link other than thought that labels and tells the story of hand being held up.

[Smudgestix]

Hi Kay

Sorry, posted reply without saying Hi.

Love
Linda

[forgetmenot]

Hey Linda,

Sorry, posted reply without saying Hi.

Hi! (smiling)

There is no experiencer of experience. There is no knower of experience just knowing experience.

Knowing experience still points to two, that there is a knowing and an experience. There is only knowingknown. Another way to put it is awarenessawared. It might seem that I am being pedantic here, but language is important as it keeps everything clear. There is no experience of X as X IS experience/knowing. ''Things', including sound, smell, taste etc cannot exist without knowing, as 'things' are nothing other than the shape knowing takes, however, knowing/experience never becomes those ‘things’.

Is there any link between the sensation and the sight, meaning that the sensation is ‘coming from’ the sight (labelled as ‘hand’) or only thought and mental constructs link them

Eyes closed, there is only sensation, thought will say hand is being held up and a mental image, but if thought is ignored there is just experience of sensation.

Eyes open there is seeing of colour, thoughts label the colour 'hand' and thought will say that sensation is coming from the sight. If this was the case then no sensation would be felt when the eyes were closed. No link other than thought that labels and tells the story of hand being held up.

“If this was the case then no sensation would be felt when the eyes were closed” – exactly! Lovely LOOKING Linda!

Here is an even deeper investigation of the body. Please follow each step, don't leave out any. Take your time. Don't move to the next step until the previous one is clearly seen. Repeat the exercise several times.

Stand in front of a bigger mirror.

(1) First, close the eyes and feel the sensations labelled ‘body’.

(2) Then open the eyes and look into the mirror while still paying attention to the sensations.

Is there any connection between the felt sensations and the image in the mirror?
Or just thoughts (and/or mental images) suggest that there is?


(3) While still paying attention to the sensations move one hand and observe the movement from the mirror.

Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and image of movement in the mirror?

(4) Now do the same movement with the hand, but this time look at the hand directly, not from the mirror.

Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and the image ‘of movement’?
Or only thoughts suggest it?

(5) Now, pay attention only to the image in the mirror.

Does the image by itself suggest in any way that is ‘you’ or ‘your body’?
Does the image itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘body’ at all?
Or are there only colours and shapes?

(6) Where the mirror ends, some parts of the body (probably legs) cannot be seen.

Just by the image in the mirror, is there any ‘knowledge’ that there must be legs, or only thoughts and mental images suggest so?

(7) Now turn away from the mirror and look forward (don’t look directly to any body parts).

Is there a ‘body’ anywhere when all thoughts and images are ignored, or are there only sensations?

(8) Start to walk slowly.

Is there a ‘body walking’, or are there only sensations?
Is there actual experience of ‘walking’ at all?
Or just THOUGHTS ABOUT ‘walking’?
Can such a thing as ‘body’ be found OR just THOUGHTS ABOUT a ‘body’?
Can such a thing as ‘walking’ be found?

(9) Are the sensations localized in space, like ‘going through the room’; OR is there only an image that is labelled ‘room’ and appearing sensations without any location?

Love, Kay

[Smudgestix]

Hi Kay

Don't think you are being pedantic. I totally understand that language is important so we are both clear.
I'd much sooner you pointed things out and go over the exercises again if necessary. Thanks for guiding me through this.

Is there any connection between the felt sensations and the image in the mirror?
Or just thoughts (and/or mental images) suggest that there is?

Closing my eyes and just feeling the sensation labelled body, there were thoughts and mental images of 'my body' of 'me waiting to open my eyes and look in a mirror' and then opening the eyes and looking into the mirror had a very surreal feeling to it at first. I did just this part quite a few times, at first there were feelings of not knowing what was looking back, there was an unsettling feeling, a real disconnection between sensation labelled body and the image in the mirror, a sense of disconnection between the two that unnerved me for a few minutes.
I stayed with the sensation and ignored the thoughts of 'who am I?' 'What is this looking back?'. The unnerving sensation passed. With no thought to prolong the 'unnerving' story, colour is appearing but it's thought labelling - mirror,reflection, body, head, legs, arms, face, hair, further thought hair needs cutting! There is no connection between the sensation and the image, it's just thought that says there is 'a body'.

Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and image of movement in the mirror?

No connection could be found. Colour appearing that thought labels as image/reflection of my hand moving. It's just thought that says there is a connection.

Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and the image ‘of movement’?
Or only thoughts suggest it?

No there is no connection. Just thought that labels sensation as hand moving. It's thought suggesting that the sensation is movement, thought labelling hand and saying it's moving.

Does the image by itself suggest in any way that is ‘you’ or ‘your body’?

No the image doesn't suggest anything it's thought that suggests its 'me' and it's 'my body'.

Does the image itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘body’ at all?

No the image itself doesn't, it's thought that suggests it is 'body'

Or are there only colours and shapes?

Only colour/shapes appearing and thought labels 'reflection' , 'body'.

Just by the image in the mirror, is there any ‘knowledge’ that there must be legs, or only thoughts and mental images suggest so?

No there is no knowledge of this. There is thought that suggests this but no knowledge. Colour appearing that thought says is reflection etc and further thoughts to say that ' my feet can't be seen in my reflection'.

Is there a ‘body’ anywhere when all thoughts and images are ignored, or are there only sensations?

No body anywhere. Just sensations . Experience as sensation, no separate 'i'.

Is there a ‘body walking’, or are there only sensations?

There is no body walking. It's sensation that thought labels movement.

Is there actual experience of ‘walking’ at all?
Or just THOUGHTS ABOUT ‘walking’?

No AE walking, AE is thought.

Can such a thing as ‘body’ be found OR just THOUGHTS ABOUT a ‘body’?

No body can be found. It's just thought about body. Label 'Body' is AE of thought.

Can such a thing as ‘walking’ be found?

No 'walking' can't be found.
'Walking' is AE of thought.

Are the sensations localized in space, like ‘going through the room’; OR is there only an image that is labelled ‘room’ and appearing sensations without any location?

There is only image labelled room and appearing sensations. 'I' do not move through a room. Colour is appearing that thought labels room, sensations appearing that thought labels body, walking.


Love
Linda

[forgetmenot]

Hey Linda,

Sensational LOOKING with the body/mirror exercise! Your answers were very clear and I have nothing further to point to about them! Nice!

Okay, so you know to ask if you have any questions for confusion around the body! We are moving onto time.

There is a general assumption that there is linear time that started (if started at all) somewhere very far in the past and advances to the distant future. The present moment (now) is considered to be a very small fragment of time or an event that is moving forward on this linear time, coming from the past and advancing to the future.

But is there an experience that the ’now’ is moving along the line of time?
Any experience of one ‘moment’ giving way to the next?
Any actual experience of one event following another?

How fast is the ‘present moment’ actually moving?

Just look at 'this moment', can you find a point where it began?

How long does the ‘now’ last?

Where does the ‘now’ start, and where does it end?

When does the ‘now’ exactly become the 'past'?

What is the ‘past’ in actual experience?

So is there actual experience of ‘time’ or thoughts about ‘time’?

Love, Kay

[Smudgestix]

Hi Kay

Really enjoyed looking at this :) Well thought says 'I' did!


Hope it comes across ok and it's explained clear.

But is there an experience that the ’now’ is moving along the line of time?

No, experience is happening now. AE Sensation felt now, thought will say it's sheets and duvet, I'm lay in bed, thought will say 'I've' been in the bath earlier, but even this thought is happening now to say I've been in the bath! It's just thought to say I'd experienced a bath earlier.

Any experience of one ‘moment’ giving way to the next?

Only experience of thought to suggest this.

Any actual experience of one event following another?

No there is no AE of an event following another, just thought to say it has.

How fast is the ‘present moment’ actually moving?

It isn't moving. 'Present moment' itself suggests time, but all experience is happening now.

Just look at 'this moment', can you find a point where it began?

No, there is only thought that suggests when it began.

How long does the ‘now’ last?

Now is always happening because all experience happens now. Past and future is thought. Even the word 'always' appears to suggests time, but can't explain with any other word.

Where does the ‘now’ start, and where does it end?

Now doesn't start as this itself suggests time, now doesn't end. Experience happens now.

When does the ‘now’ exactly become the 'past'?

The now never becomes the past. All experience is felt now, whether it be sound, colour, sensation, taste or thought it is happening now. It will be thought that's says it is past.

What is the ‘past’ in actual experience?

No there is no AE of past just AE thought. There are thoughts about the past but they are experienced 'now'. All experience is happening 'now'. Thoughts are the only thing that says its 'past' but even that thought is experienced 'now'

So is there actual experience of ‘time’ or thoughts about ‘time’?

There is no AE of time just thoughts about time.

[forgetmenot]

Hey Linda,

Great looking...loved the bit about the sheets and duvet! I have no questions for you with regards to your responses!

Just out of interest, have a look at the second hand on a clock. It seems to be changing. But can you find 10 seconds ago in actual experience? 5 seconds? 1 second? Keep noticing that change is always only a story about some experience "prior to this". But only THIS can be found. How could there have been another experience at all? Where has it gone to?

Memory is linked to time. Almost everybody believes that a memory thought is referring to something that has happened.
That a memory thought is a different thought than a non-memory thought.

What is memory exactly? – please don’t go to thought explanation, but just let a memory be there, and look at it…

What is the memory ‘made of’?
WHEN does the memory appear?

What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘memory’ thought?

How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened?

Then, look at a thought about the future.
What is the future thought ‘made of’?

WHEN does the future thought appear?

What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘future’ thought?
How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘future’ thought refers to something that will happen?

Then let’s compare a thought about past and a thought about the future.
What is the EXACT difference between the thoughts about past and future?
If there is difference, how that difference is known exactly?

Look at what is actually going on and not what thoughts say… but what actually is.

Love, Kay

[Smudgestix]

Hi Kay

Sorry for the delay in replying.

This was a difficult one to put into words. Again, I hope it's explained clear.

What is memory exactly? – please don’t go to thought explanation, but just let a memory be there, and look at it

Memory is made of thought, story of the past and mental image.The memory is here now, thought will say it happened in the past.

What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘memory’ thought?

General thought, will label and tell a story of experience in the now and will also tell a story of the future, but memory thought is a thought about a past, a thought 'remembered' by another thought. But the actual thought about being remembered is just another thought.

How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened

It is not know exactly that the memory thought has happened in the past. The only experience of the memory thought is the experience of thought now.

What is the future thought ‘made of’?

Future though is made of thought telling start with no thought of remembering a previous thought or experience. But future thought is a thought experienced now.

WHEN does the future thought appear?

It is experienced now.

What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘future’ thought?
How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘future’ thought refers to something that will happen?

Looked and could not find a difference, its thought telling a story about something that could happen. It's isn't known that a future thought is about something that will happen, it's thought referring to time and telling a story.

Then let’s compare a thought about past and a thought about the future.
What is the EXACT difference between the thoughts about past and future?
If there is difference, how that difference is known exactly?

A memory thought relies on a thought that it has 'remembered' a previous thought. But whether it be a memory thought or future thought they are both thoughts that are experienced now.

Love
Linda

[Smudgestix]

Hi Kay

This has been bugging me, I've been looking at this over and over.
Thoughts will appear 'after' the experience, this suggests time I know but can't believe explain in any other way, the thought is happening now but referring to something in the past all the time.Thought will come in to label colour, sensation, taste, etc after it has been experienced, thought suggests time has past to say this colour is black or the sensation is warm.
Looking at the second hand on the clock, seeing colour, thought then says that the hand has moved on but the seeing of the 'clock hand' is what is happening now, it's just thought that suggests movement from past to now. Thought will suggest a past of some sort from everything that is experienced.
I close my eyes now and colour is experienced and thought will say this colour is black because I've closed my eyes, and it's thought that says the 'closing of eyes' was experienced in the past. Colour is experienced now not thought.
I don't see that there is a difference between a memory thought, or future thought. They are both happening now as with any general thought.

Love
Linda

[Smudgestix]

Can't find a past or a future. It's just experience happening continually. It's seamless.

[Smudgestix]

Hi Kay

This has been bugging me, I've been looking at this over and over. It's difficult to explain without referring to thought.
Thoughts will appear 'after' the experience, this suggests time I know but can't explain in any other way, the thought is happening now but referring to something in the past all the time.Thought will come in to label colour, sensation, taste, etc after it has been experienced, thought suggests time has past to say this colour is black or the sensation is warm.
Looking at the second hand on the clock, seeing colour, thought then says that the hand has moved on but the seeing of the 'clock hand' is what is happening now, it's just thought that suggests movement from past to now. Thought will suggest a past of some sort from everything that is experienced.
I close my eyes now and colour is experienced and thought will say this colour is black because I've closed my eyes, and it's thought that says the 'closing of eyes' was experienced in the past. Colour is experienced now not thought.
I don't see that there is a difference between a memory thought, or future thought. They are both happening now as with any general thought.

Love
Linda

[forgetmenot]

Hello Linda,

What is memory exactly? – please don’t go to thought explanation, but just let a memory be there, and look at it

Memory is made of thought, story of the past and mental image. The memory is here now, thought will say it happened in the past.

Yes, so a ‘memory’ thought is simply AE of thought. Thought points to it being something that happened in a past, however, the thoughts/images are arising now about something that thought says happened in a past.

What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘memory’ thought?

General thought, will label and tell a story of experience in the now and will also tell a story of the future, but memory thought is a thought about a past, a thought 'remembered' by another thought. But the actual thought about being remembered is just another thought.

There is no difference between a general thought or a so called memory thought, they are simply thought that are appearing now.

Thought cannot remember anything. Thought is simply thought and has no awareness, no intelligence…nada, nothing. A thought is like a cloud that appears in the sky and then drifts away. Does a cloud have any intelligence or awareness?

Have you ever looked at thought? Really looked at it?
Does thought have a voice? Does thought hear? Does thought see? Does thought taste, smell or feel? Does a thought think?
Can a thought be felt? Can you taste a thought? Can you smell a thought? Can you describe thought?
Does thought know anything, or is it saying stuff and not knowing what it's talking about?

How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened

It is not know exactly that the memory thought has happened in the past. The only experience of the memory thought is the experience of thought now.

The question was how is it known that a ‘memory’ thought REFERS to something that has happened.

What is the future thought ‘made of’?

Future though is made of thought telling start with no thought of remembering a previous thought or experience. But future thought is a thought experienced now.

I don’t understand the beginning of what you wrote, however, a future thought is just a thought appearing now that is referencing something about a future. In other words it is pointing to something that has not happened yet and may not happen. However, you will find that most future thoughts are based on something that has happened in the past.

The thoughts ABOUT a future are appearing now, however are the content of the thoughts actually happening now?

WHEN does the future thought appear?

It is experienced now.

It is appearing now, yes.

What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘future’ thought?
How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘future’ thought refers to something that will happen?

Looked and could not find a difference, its thought telling a story about something that could happen. It's isn't known that a future thought is about something that will happen, it's thought referring to time and telling a story.

Yes, exactly so there is no difference between a general thought and a future thought. The label ‘general’ and the label ‘future’ are simply AE of thought. They seem to point to different things, however, is the actual experience of thought any different just because the content of the thought is different?

Then let’s compare a thought about past and a thought about the future.
What is the EXACT difference between the thoughts about past and future?
If there is difference, how that difference is known exactly?

A memory thought relies on a thought that it has 'remembered' a previous thought. But whether it be a memory thought or future thought they are both thoughts that are experienced now.

Just sit quietly for 10 minutes and observe thought. You will see 99.5% of it is about the past. Does a thought need to remember a thought about something for it to appear or does it just simply appear with a thought ‘saying’ that they are thoughts about a past?

This has been bugging me, I've been looking at this over and over.
Thoughts will appear 'after' the experience, this suggests time I know but can't believe explain in any other way, the thought is happening now but referring to something in the past all the time. Thought will come in to label colour, sensation, taste, etc after it has been experienced, thought suggests time has past to say this colour is black or the sensation is warm.

Yes exactly. We are not denying time, we are just seeing what actually is. The idea of time and space will still continue, and thoughts generally reference the past and usually appear claiming something that has just happened. For example, you make a cup of coffee and thought will appear saying “I just made a cup of coffee”. Or a thought may appear saying “I am going to make a cup of coffee” and making coffee happens. Did you make those thoughts appear or did they just appear?

Looking at the second hand on the clock, seeing colour, thought then says that the hand has moved on but the seeing of the 'clock hand' is what is happening now, it's just thought that suggests movement from past to now. Thought will suggest a past of some sort from everything that is experienced.

Yes, it is really amazing how the idea of time and space occur. And it will continue on so, it has always been that way, yes? But it is just clearly seen for what it is. Actual experience is either happening right now or it is just a thought story.

If thought says that you saw a spectacular sunrise yesterday…is that sunrise experience as you presently find it? No…so it is just thought story ie ‘imagination’. If however, the colours labelled ‘spectacular sunrise’ is experience as you presently find it (ie now), then thought is pointing to actual experience as you presently find it. That is, that the colour thoughts refer to a 'sunrise' are what are actually appearing now.

Thought either points to actual experience as you presently find it...or it is pointing to further thought about actual experience which is not the current experience which then equates to just story...thought fluff. All thought is empty of content UNLESS it is pointing to AE... thought "cold" = sensation brrbrr.
Is this clear?

I close my eyes now and colour is experienced and thought will say this colour is black because I've closed my eyes, and it's thought that says the 'closing of eyes' was experienced in the past. Colour is experienced now not thought.
I don't see that there is a difference between a memory thought, or future thought. They are both happening now as with any general thought.

YES! Exactly! I am glad you kept at it until you saw that, general, past, and future are all labels and that thoughts no matter what they are pointing to are just thought and are appearing now, even if they are referring to a ‘past’ or ‘future’.

A thought is much like a piece of graffiti scribbled on a wall. Graffiti doesn't know the wall exists. It doesn't know it is appearing on the wall. It doesn't know whether its words are true or not. It doesn't know that it is saying anything. It doesn't know anything *whatsoever*. Similarly, a thought is just a bit of decoration appearing in THIS. It appears. You are aware of it. But it knows nothing whatsoever about reality. And that is all there is to thought

Love, Kay

[Smudgestix]

Hi Kay

Thanks for being patient and reading what appear as gargled messages at times. It's difficult sometimes to put into words or to see clearly straight away, but I look at these exercises throughout the day and go back to look over other exercises. It eventually becomes clearer.
I like the example of thought being like graffiti on a wall. :)

Have you ever looked at thought? Really looked at it?
Does thought have a voice? Does thought hear? Does thought see? Does thought taste, smell or feel? Does a thought think?
Can a thought be felt? Can you taste a thought? Can you smell a thought? Can you describe thought?
Does thought know anything, or is it saying stuff and not knowing what it's talking about?

No a thought cannot do any of those things. Thought knows nothing, it just says stuff.

The question was how is it known that a ‘memory’ thought REFERS to something that has happened

It isn't known. Memory thought is just a thought saying something has happened.

The thoughts ABOUT a future are appearing now, however are the content of the thoughts actually happening now?

No the content of the thought isn't happening now. It just thought telling a story about what will/ could happen.

Yes, exactly so there is no difference between a general thought and a future thought. The label ‘general’ and the label ‘future’ are simply AE of thought. They seem to point to different things, however, is the actual experience of thought any different just because the content of the thought is different?

No the AE of thought is no different because of its content.

Just sit quietly for 10 minutes and observe thought. You will see 99.5% of it is about the past. Does a thought need to remember a thought about something for it to appear or does it just simply appear with a thought ‘saying’ that they are thoughts about a past?

No a thought cannot remember a thought. It is just thought saying it is the past, and will go on to tell a story and say it was in the past.

Thought either points to actual experience as you presently find it...or it is pointing to further thought about actual experience which is not the current experience which then equates to just story...thought fluff. All thought is empty of content UNLESS it is pointing to AE... thought "cold" = sensation brrbrr.
Is this clear?

Yes I see this clearly. Thought will point to AE that is being experienced now or will point to further thought, story telling.

Love
Linda

[forgetmenot]

Hi Linda,

Thanks for being patient and reading what appear as gargled messages at times. It's difficult sometimes to put into words or to see clearly straight away, but I look at these exercises throughout the day and go back to look over other exercises. It eventually becomes clearer.

I know you are LOOKING as you write the extra when you ponder it further which shows you continue to look, which is wonderful because looking is the key. And yes, it can be challenging to see it clearly straight away. If my pointing is not clear then say so and I will find another way to point so it becomes clearer.

Do you have any questions about anything we have explored together, or questions on anything you are not clear about? Is there any confusion at all or anything you would like to address?

Has it been clearly seen that there is no separate individual (“I/me”), and never has been?

Do you notice a difference now, to when you first started this exploration, and if so what are those differences?

Love, Kay