Dzogchen

[Beyond]

Yep feeling the body is happening indeed: love it and going to experience this today, thkxs

[Monkfield]

You can do the same exercise with any of the five senses ... hearing is good one ...

Close your eyes and bring your attention to a noticeable sound - traffic passing by, the hum of a fridge, a clock ticking, or anything audible that attracts your attention, really focus on the experience of hearing that sound.

Now repeat the following two descriptions of this experience:

1. "I am hearing the sound"

2. "hearing the sound is happening"

Stay with this experience for a while and repeat the two descriptions occasionally.

Is there a difference between the experiences when you say "I am hearing the sound" and when you say "hearing the sound is happening"?

Is there an actual experience of a hearer of the sound? or does the actual experience only consist of hearing?

Can you find any evidence for a hearer that is separate from the hearing of the sound?

Please report your experiences back to me ... I am looking forward to hearing all about it :)

[Beyond]

dear

first remarks:

all seems being connected and seperation stops: identification stops...
there seems to be an eternal now..
it seems as seeing through all at once..
all is more vivid...
the body even seems to cease to excist...

kind regards

[Monkfield]

The definition of an illusion is something that appears to be something other than what it actually is, and to see through an illusion therefore is to see something for what it actually is rather than what it appears to be.

To see through the illusion of a separate self is to see that it only exists in imagination, it is nowhere to be found in actual experience.

To see through the illusion of a separate self is also to see that it has never existed outside imagination - it is not that a "me" that once existed suddenly disappears, because there never actually was a "me" in the first place, never has been, there was only ever an unexamined assumption or belief that there was a "me", so the only thing that disappears is that erroneous belief.

When the veil of illusion drops, all that is left is what is ... experience without an experiencer.

Let me know if you would like to spend some more time looking for the separate self in actual experience, or if you are ready to have a look for a thinker of thoughts ... or are there thoughts without a thinker? ;)

[Beyond]

experience without an experiencer
thoughts without a thinker of course....

if you please continu...

[Monkfield]

Ok, let's take a look at the thought process in more detail ...

Just sit, let thoughts come up and look into them, answering the following questions from actual experience:

Where do thoughts come from and where do they go to?

Do you send them away?

Do you know what you're going to think before you think it?

Sit quietly for a moment and try to predict your next thought. Does it work?

Do you plan what you are going to think before you think it?

Can you suppress your next thought before it arises? Does it work?

Is there is a thought that you can control?

What can a thought do – what power does it have?

Did any of these thoughts come on purpose?

You experience thoughts, but do you experience the content? Is the content real?

Think of a number between 1 and 99. Can you tell which number will come before it is there?

Share what you find.

Kind wishes,

Monkfield

P.S. I would appreciate if you quote the questions separately so I know what your answers are referring to.

[Beyond]

1. where do..? they come and go out of nowhere
2. do you..? nope
3. do you know what..? nope impossible
4. sit quitely..? nope
5. do you plan ...? nope
6. can you suppress... ? nope
7. is there a...? nope
8. what can.. what power...? in the "is happening" mode: not much , in the" dual "mode: change moods/focus/point of view...
9. did any of...? nope
10. you experience...?is the content real ? Nope for both of course

[Beyond]

sorry forgot: 11. think of a number...? nope

[Monkfield]

Ok Beyond, let's have a quick review of where we are up to ...

You have seen that there is no experiencer of experiences ... there is just experiencing.

You have seen that there is no thinker of thoughts ... there is just thinking.

So "you" are not an experiencer of experiences.

And "you" are not a thinker of thoughts.

So what exactly is this elusive "you" then?

Do you still feel that "you" are bound to a mirage/idea/concept?

Do you still feel that "you" want to liberate this mirage/idea/concept?

If so ... where is this "you" that feels bound hiding?

We have not found any evidence for its actual existence yet have we?

When you say "I am bound" or "I want to liberate", what do you think you might be referring to with the word "I"?

Is there something else we need to look at?

The doer of deeds perhaps? Maybe it's the chooser of choices? Or the controller of actions?

Let me know if there is still a lingering feeling that the word "I" refers to something "real" somehow that we have not yet examined.

[Beyond]

there is NO "I" or "You" ...
only that empty (w)hole generating ...no form, no time , no identity, no nothing at all...

[Monkfield]

Hi there Beyond,

Hope you had a great weekend!

It is quite tricky for me to get a sense from your responses of whether or not you are now seeing that there is no "I" - perhaps you can elaborate a little for me?

It seems to me that you have had an understanding of the conceptually constructed nature of separate selfness from the very beginning of our dialogue but I am not clear if this has now shifted to an experiential seeing that there is really nothing to it.

Please help me to understand where you are at :)

Many thanks,

John.

[Beyond]

Correct , in daily life the 'I' is indeed also there...Sure in knowing it isn't but indeed to experience that all the time , not yet ...

[Monkfield]

Correct , in daily life the 'I' is indeed also there...Sure in knowing it isn't but indeed to experience that all the time , not yet ...

Ok, thanks for the clarification.

I would like to examine your phrase "in daily life the 'I' is indeed also there" in detail as there appear to be some unexamined assumptions underlying a couple of your words:

What is "the 'I'" ??

Where is "there" ??

If "the 'I'" is known to be nothing more than an idea, and "there" is therefore in imagination, then you know that "the 'I'" is never actually experienced, only imagining is experienced.

If you know that Santa Claus is not real and therefore only exists in imagination, then you know that Santa Claus is never actually experienced, only imagining is experienced.

Knowing that Santa Claus is not real does not stop you from imagining the idea of Santa Claus.

Perhaps you are expecting to no longer experience imagining "the 'I'" - if so this is one of those expectations that we talked about at the beginning that might be a hindrance to this inquiry.

The only thing that happens when you see through the illusion of Santa Claus is that a belief that you once held is undermined - it is the belief that is destroyed, not Santa Claus!! :) He still exists exactly as he did before, in your imagination, it's just that you now know that's only where he exists.

Do you remember what it was like when you believed in Santa Claus?

Do you see the difference now that you no longer have that belief?

What power does Santa Claus have over you these days? :)

So I return to my earlier questions:

In your phrase "in daily life the 'I' is indeed also there" ...

What is "the 'I'" ... what are you identifying with?

Where is "there" ... let's get specific, if there are times when "the 'I'" is not "there", and other times when it is, what is the difference?

[Beyond]

All in the mind imagining indeed...
Good comparison...Santa Claus and the I as An imagine de product...got it..it'll be in the imagine de state there....

[Monkfield]

Another good comparison is to compare the words "me" and "university" ...

Let's look at the word "university". What does this label point to? Is there such thing as university in real life? There are buildings, students, books, classes, professors, are any of them university? Or is it just a word, that we use for communication, so we can understand each other?

Now let's look at the word "me". What does this label point to? Is there such thing as me in real life? There are thoughts, feelings, sensations, sights, sounds, are any of them me? Or is it just a word, that we use for communication, so we can understand each other?