Falling into

[Cloudberry]

When these concepts are activated, pure seeing is lost.
Is that true?

It seems true.

What do these concepts consist of?

Subject / object.
Subject "me"- object "that"
Subject "Me, here" - Object that over there which is "not me"

When in the story pure seeing is lost.
Is that true?

It seems true

What is either within or without the story?

I wish I could get this once and for all. I know the answer is nothing is within or without of the story. It's all just thoughts. But it can seem so real and can seem like there is a person, "me" "I" in a story.

What does not see clearly?

a constant stream of me referencing , narrative,

It's this I need to keep looking at right, real time. ?

Thank you once again for your patience. It's so kind of you to be so patient.

[Matthew]

Thank you once again for your patience. It's so kind of you to be so patient.

It's fine, really! Don't worry about that!

Subject / object.
Subject "me"- object "that"
Subject "Me, here" - Object that over there which is "not me"

Focus only on the seen for now.

Is there a "me" in seeing?`

Is there a "that" in the seen?

Subject "Me, here"

Can this be SEEN?

Object that over there which is "not me"

Does the raw seen tell anything about "me" or about "not me"?

[Cloudberry]

It's fine, really! Don't worry about that!

Thank you

Is there a "me" in seeing?`

Is there a "that" in the seen?

When I look into seeing, there is just seeing. Seeing is immediate, automatic. If I close my eyes for a while and then open them, seeing happens immediately. I don't do it, it just happens.

So is there a "me" or a "that" in seeing? Ultimately there is just seeing. The seen and the interpretation comes after and is applied on top.

Does the raw seen tell anything about "me" or about "not me"?

The RAW seen just is. It doesn't tell about me or not me.

Can this be SEEN?

There is thoughts about me and what is seen. There is an aliveness present that knows seeing is happening. There is a bare knowing present. However I had some insight this morning and I think I'm closer to understanding what we are talking about here.

Take a pet. An animal. A cat, a dog a bird. It is what it is. Let's say a beautiful white owl is rescued by a bird sanctuary and then kept in captivity. It's white. So what do people do, they give it a name. Snowy (because it's white) , whisper (because it flies silently) A name is applied. This beautiful animal is then known by it's name. The animal is then known by it's name and attributes applied to this name. There is an extra layer of meaning that is added. An extra layer of meaning. An Identity is created that doesn't really exist. It is imagined. This beautiful white owl is now... snowy and known as snowy. Snowy likes to sit by the window, snowy likes fish, snowy likes having his chin tickled, snowy likes blah blah blah and on it goes. This extra layer of meaning that doesn't really exist.

It's the same with us right? Robert, Matthew are names we were given. They are a label that is applied. Other labels are then applied about us, tall, thin, funny, fast runner, etc etc etc. This identity is born. This "me" this "I" this outer wrapper around experience. It's this extra layer around experience that we are looking at.... right? This fictional creation in thought.

This is the me we are talking about, right?

I'm not sure if that essay made any sense? But it ran through my head this morning and resonated. How we name pets and give them meaning that is created and fabricated and how "we" do the same thing with ourselves. We then view the world, our life through the eyes of this character. Not real. Just thoughts.

Am I on the right track?

Taking that insight and applying it to seeing. Firstly seeing is always happening. I cannot control it. In fact any control over it is illusion right. Even if I think I'll look at the curtains now, that is a thought. "I" cannot have a thought, thought happens on it's own. "I" cannot think. Thinking just happens.

There is this layer in the middle that thinks it is in control, that thinks it is living a life, that thinks.........

Does any of this make sense?

[Matthew]

Yes, very good track!

You could apply ANY name for this organism called "me", couldn't you?
If you would take on a new name tomorrow, would this be bothering?

Is there anything special about the thought/word/sound "Robert"?

[Cloudberry]

Ok, very interesting.
Sat with pen and paper and journaled to your three questions, pointers.
Humbling what I found. Time for honesty. There are a couple of ways to answer the questions. There can be a tendency to answer with the answer that seems to be the correct answer. Then there is the answer that is known to be the wrong answer but is the answer that feels true.

You could apply ANY name for this organism called "me", couldn't you?

Yes, you could apply any name to this organism, after all, it's just a name. A Rose by any other name would smell as sweet. It's just a label used for communication purposes. A reference. It would be confusing if we all had the same name. There is a practical reason for names. Yes, that's it. It serves a practical purpose.

However I also found this answer.

You could apply ANY name for this organism called "me", couldn't you?

No, Robert is my name. It is what my parents called me. Why not any other name? Because I am special.
Not any name, it depends if I liked it or not. It's how people see me. depends if I liked it or didn't like it.

If you would take on a new name tomorrow, would this be bothering?

That could be quite fun. I my wife has a different name for me and that's ok. I had a childhood nickname which was used by people for decades much more than my given name.

If you would take on a new name tomorrow, would this be bothering?

If I liked it, it would be fun. If I didn't like it, it would be bothering.
It's the name given to me. When I meet other Roberts I feel a connection

Is there anything special about the thought/word/sound "Robert"?

Robert is who I am
Robert is what I am
Robert is how I interact with the world
Robert is how people speak to me, contact me, communicate with me


There is a belief here that Robert is who I am. How humbling to find this. On one hand it is known logically that a name is a label and not who I am. On the other there is what I presume to be a belief that Robert is who I am. It feels like sharing a dirty secret. Like I should be beyond this.

Thank you

[Matthew]

There is a belief here that Robert is who I am.

If "I am Robert" is clearly seen as being just a belief, can you drop it for a moment?

What is left here when there is no idea of "I am this" or "I am that"?

[Cloudberry]

Looking into this here is what is seen so far.

The question, questioning, questioner maybe. Although the questioner seems to be nothing more than just questioning.

Sensations, sounds, ringing in ears, seeing breathing, thoughts.
When all of that is known together there is that merging together into oneness that happens. It's like an emptiness that's full of everything. Although that's sounds a bit grand if body sensations and sounds are held together in awareness it's as if they are not different

Experience.

Awareness.


I'll continue looking.

[Matthew]

Can there ever be anything else than this oneness?
Can there ever be anything else than this emptiness, which is full of everything?

if body sensations and sounds are held together in awareness it's as if they are not different

Good observation!
"Sensation" or "sound" is also just a label.
Where does sensation end and sound begin?
Where does the seen end and thought begin?
Such a separation also does not exist.

[Cloudberry]

This has been an interesting couple of days.

Can there ever be anything else than this oneness?
Can there ever be anything else than this emptiness, which is full of everything?

No, there is only this oneness.
It's been so interesting looking into this. I was going to write "there is only this oneness AND ALL IT CONTAINS". The many creatures and life forms and people etc. But, when looked into even these different "things" are known by consciousness through sense doors but also via language. It's the language that creates the separation. The "knowing" things via language puts everything into a neat little box. The knowing via direct experience is a very different thing all together. When I really stop and look into experience. When sounds, smells, tastes, feelings sensations, sights, thoughts are experienced it all merges into one experience. Even here and there ceases to mean anything. This looking has been quite something and led to some interesting experiences of deep calm and pleasantness.

Sitting with my breakfast this morning. Some toast, a cup of coffee. The coffee cup was wet on the bottom and left a ring on the table. As I was looking at this ring I realised, it's all here, sight, sound, taste, smell, touch, thoughts and not only is it all here but it always has been here, all the time, right here. It made me smile. The very thing you led me to see was always here the whole time, so incredibly close, you can't see it unless you look, or know how to look.

It's been like a deconstructing of experience.
Investigating what is here, Re-learning, Re-discovering. The amazing but completely obvious. The ordinary but the extraordinary. Been here all along out in the open.


Is there a separate me? I've not had a boom "aha I see it now, there isn't a separate me" But there cannot be as everything is included in oneness. So nothing is missing or lacking. Even a sense of a separate self must be included. there cannot be a separate me outside of this oneness. I'm seeing how decisions are not made by me. Action happens before thought. The illusion is dropping away. I suspect there is still a but more to see through but that could just be a story? Well, it is a story.

Who is writing this? What is writing this? The words just arrive in thought and the body moves.

Thanks

[Matthew]

Beautiful..

I've not had a boom "aha I see it now..."

Could you drop this last remaining expectation?
Drop it just for a moment!

Once it is gone, have a look:
What needs a "BOOM"-experience?

[Cloudberry]

Could you drop this last remaining expectation?
Drop it just for a moment!

Yes. I can drop it for a moment. It's very simple and peaceful and I smile

Once it is gone, have a look:
What needs a "BOOM"-experience?

There's nothing there and everything there if that makes sense.

There's still non stop blah blah blah going on, but when you said "Could you drop this last remaining expectation?
Drop it just for a moment!" I was able to pause and let go and then I run out of words to describe. There's just existing.

I've really started to notice how "I'm" not doing anything. Action happens then thought comes in afterwards. So, work get's done, conversations take place, food gets eaten, cats get fed and stroked, breath gets breathed, words get typed, all happening without an "I" doing it. Story happens and can seem believable but your pointer of "drop it just for a moment" has been really helpful

Sounds good, right?

[Matthew]

Sounds pretty good, yeah!

Does this "Blah Blah Blah" seem to be a problem?

[Cloudberry]

Thinking does dominate experience rather.

I'd be happy to explore a little further if you are ok to do so

The intensity of "real seeing" has weakened. This could be normal though and the reality of interfacing with a busy world and responsibilities etc.

Let's go with "I" haven't quite got it yet. That seems to ring true.

[Matthew]

Thinking does dominate experience rather.

Is that true?
Have a look right now!

What exactly is dominated?

The seen?
The heard?

What is dominated?

[Cloudberry]

Thinking does dominate experience rather.

Is that true?
Have a look right now!

No, it's not true.

What exactly is dominated?

When I look there is no-thing dominated.

Upon thinking about trying to explain what I mean. Thought story dominates awareness or takes up attentional resources and less awareness is given to sounds, smells, taste, feelings etc. Or I guess what I'm saying is thoughts stories seem louder, more real. Thinking dominates available awareness

Yet when I look for what is dominated no object can be found that is dominated. There is only awareness or consciousness.

That sounds disjointed but I wanted to give it a shot and see what it brings up