Continuing with Mitzuko

[Matthew]

This is where we left off:

the Word "I" associated with a feeling of existence which in turn seems to be located in the chest/head

Is that true?

To start off the looking at the relationsship of sensation and thought, here a lovely excercise.
Please do it joyfully and thoroughly:

Find a quiet place and a quiet moment.
Sit or lay down and relax. Relax.
Can you attend to sensation exclusively?
Not minding thought babbling about this and that. Not minding thought giving "meaning" to sensation?

(Non-Verbal) Thought might tell that "I am lying" here or "My body is lying here" or "A body is lying here".
But could this be known from pure sensation?

(Non-Verbal) Thought might give a sense of there being "soft pressure against the back".
But does raw sensation tell anything about "soft", "pressure" or "back"?

Upon having arrived there, please pose the following questions.

While ONLY attending to sensation.

Can it be known how tall the body is?
Does the body have a specific shape, size or weight?
How many toes are there?

[mitzuko]

Before answering you i have to make a premise.
I find this excercise both very difficult and easy.
On the One hand It is very difficult to do it, as i have to make a lot of effort both in putting Myself to do It and in "staying there".
The thought already know the answer, so it immediately overlaps the raw perception and describes it and it seems like "veiling It", "obscure It", so i can not stand enough in the raw perception to have time to understand if i really feel It, or think It, or both things since the "result" seems to coincide.
Furthermore the thought seems to be like a Torch that illuminates only what It "said", and overlap the raw and direct experience, i still have the doubt that this precludes me the possibility of performing the excercise in a truly open and innocent way and therefore the possibility of seeing more true/broad/Deep.
I describe this to tell you that I did not fully "trust" on the answer, for the reasons mentioned above.
Made this premise, the answer (which seems at the same time easy and not "hidden") for you is:
With closed eyes there is no body but only indefinable and no-localizable sensations.
Even with open eyes but the see makes things a little more complicated

[Matthew]

Yes, it might take some time of getting used to.
Might need some "practice". To start looking at actual experience as opposed to dwelling in thought content.

Have a try again!
Take your time and RELAX into it!
When lying in bed, attend to sensation in a curious and playful way.

Then also in the same way attend to sound.
Does sound ever provide any more information than "sound"?

[mitzuko]

hello Matthew, I do not have big things to tell you, just inform you that "I'm working on it" and tell you what happens.

first, as I told you, I have to make a big effort to "put myself to do the exercise" because not always at the arrive of the thought "now I dedicate myself to witness the physical sensations undressed by mental interpretations" (and most of the time I do not know not even HOW to do it, from how much they are so "stuck" to each other), it follows that I really do it, often I find an excuse to say "ok not now, I'll do it in a better time" (and I'm very angry with me for this).

second thing
it is very difficult for me to "stay" on the sensation for a little more than a few seconds without a river of thoughts coming to take away the attention from the "exploration".
that is, "they do not give me the time!"
so I keep trying every time I can think of it and I immediately feel this strong resistance to divert attention from thought to direct it on the feeling naked.
the only thing "interesting" that happened to me is that today I closed a finger in the door (!!!!!!!).
initially there was the usual reaction, PAIN.
then a thought was born: WHAT IS THIS?

immediately the experience was transformed, it was no longer "pain" (with all the resistance and dismay that ensue), it was just a strong feeling.
that's all
It was an interesting thing to notice.

then, at times, I see clearly how much we live in a world of concepts, words, as if we were children who started to give names to "things", then forgetting that the name is NOT the thing, not captures the essence, does not define it, does not "explain" it.
it's just a name, just a word, just a set of letters put one after the other without any intrinsic meaning, in practice it's nothing.
I keep trying ...

[Matthew]

in practice it's nothing.

Very well!

I keep trying ...

It's fine!
No more great effort here. Let's do it as effortless as possible.

the Word "I" associated with a feeling of existence which in turn seems to be located in the chest/head

Then have a relaxed look again at this idea.

as if we were children who started to give names to "things"

Isn't it just the name "I" that was given to a sensation?
Does that truly make it "I"?

I'm very angry with me

An "I" as angry with a "me".
That doesn't make sense, does it?
;-)

[mitzuko]

"the Word "i" associated with a feeling of existence which in turn seems to be located in the chest head"
... The have a relaxed look again at this idea...

- the word "I" continues to be associated with a sense of PERSONAL existence.
As regards the "localization" , perhaps i begin to open Myself to the possibility that it is not necessarily "in the body", After all, It is also an object of perception.
(Even if there remains a sense of familiarity, like what One feels for "one's own house")


"As if we were children who started to give names to "things"
.... isn't it just the name"I" that was given to a sensation?....

- Yes, It is, but I understand It only on a conceptual level
I can not "break through" this Wall.

....does that truly make It "I"? ...

- same thing, i understand It on a conceptual level.
The word "me" is just a Word, ok and i recognize that the words are NOTHING.
It could be any other word.
The word "xemdr" could point to what i feel (or think?) To BE and in that case this set of letters would had the same meaning I feel for "I".

....an"I" as angry with a "me".
That doesn't make sense does it?

-unfortunately for me it makes sense, because perceiving me (or thinking me?) As EXISTING and AGENT, if a feeling of frustration arises with conseguent anger for the delay/failure of process that I feel depends on me,that sentiment is direct towards to the me considered responsible.
I understand that even here it's all' mental stuff, but understanding It is not enough.


Than, i wish to ask you something.
I know that the "question/answer process" should be more intense, so that the process works, or works better.
But I loosen it a lot with my response after day
I do not do It voluntarily.
In the contrary, it is something that puts pressure on me but on which i feel i have no control, simply, often after having "given birth" a response, or After reading yours, i can not see for a while.
So i'm simply waiting for the process to untagle itself.
Or rather, i try to "force" by repeatedly returning to your questions, but simply "nothing comes to me".
Could this be a "trickery" of the ego to ease the tension so as not to get to the point of "break" necessary?
Can this "loosening" actually obstacle the process?

P.s. how can i use the "quote" from my smartphone?

Thank you for all :-)

[Matthew]

Yes, simply answer when an answer comes up.
This can be immediately, or hours later or days later.
Whenever it feels good!


The quote function can be used on the smartphone like it can be used on a computer.
Hold down on a written word for a second until it is highlighted. Then drag the little arrow over all words, that shall be quoted, so that all of them are highlighted. Then hit the "Quote"-button at the top of the area.
If it doesn't work, simply put all quoted words into "".

i begin to open Myself to the possibility that it is not necessarily "in the body"

What exactly would the "I in the body" be?
An organ like the heart?
A little entity sitting in the head behind a steering wheel?
That's ridiculous, isn't it?

I can not "break through" this Wall.

Please describe this wall in detail!
Where is it located? What colour does it have? What material is it made of?

If you cannot answer the questions above.
Does this "Wall" actually exist?

[mitzuko]

What exactly would the "I in the body" be?
An organ like the heart?
A little entity sitting in the head behind a steering wheel?
That's ridiculous, isn't it?

just a product of the brain.
a biological organism so developed that it has "functions" capable of self-awareness
nothing more than a physical body

Please describe this wall in detail!
Where is it located? What colour does it have? What material is it made of?

If you cannot answer the questions above.
Does this "Wall" actually exist?

The Wall does not exist, it was just a metaphor to describe what I feel: not being able to go beyond a mental understanding

[Matthew]

The Wall does not exist

How about that "thing" or "one", which apparently needs to overcome a wall?
Does that exist in present experience?
Have a look!
Report what can be found.
If something can be found, that needs to overcome a wall, describe it in the same way as the "wall".

Where exactly is it located? What colour does it have? What material is it made of?

just a product of the brain.

You need to understand the difference between "thinking" and looking at things as they are.
Can a "brain" be found in present experience?
Where does this idea come from?

[mitzuko]

Does that exist in present experience?

Exist Only in thoughts
but this does not make it less real.. : /

Can a "brain" be found in present experience?

No

Where does this idea come from?

From a thought

[Matthew]

Exist Only in thoughts
but this does not make it less real..

Is thought content EVER something real?

[mitzuko]

in the direct experience perceived by the senses, I find nothing that says "I"
the body for how much (between the "objects" "materials") I feel it the closest and the next thing to what I feel to be, does not say "I"
only the thoughts speak of "I".
ok
but this "I" in the thought POINT to a feeling of EXISTENCE, OF BEING, OF PRESENCE.
I feel like of BEING here
and I feel it as something, in some way, PERSONAL

then I ask myself: I FEEL to be there or I THINK of being there?
this feeling, says "I"?
I can not see it.

when you ask me if the content of the thoughts is EVER real, I see that the content of the thoughts is a phrase (or image) that appears, remains for a while and then disappears and this is his only reality, but can still POINTING to something real.

and here in the intertwining of these two things (feeling to be there and the thought that when says "I" points to this feeling, that I feel real and PERSONAL) that I stumble.

[mitzuko]

another thing: I continue to assume that a subject is necessary for perception to occur.
in this subject, obviously "I" is hiding

[Matthew]

Is there ever anything hidden in present experience?
No! Since anything "hidden" would be just an assumption.
If you ever want to get this over with, you need to stop making assumptions and start looking at things as they are!!!

but can still POINTING to something real

We can say that for the moment.
Then please, on this basis, have a look!!!
The thought "tree" points to a tree. Okay.
The thought "smartphone" points to a smartphone. Okay.

What does the thought "O" point to?
What does the thought "I" point to?

but this "I" in the thought POINT to a feeling of EXISTENCE, OF BEING, OF PRESENCE.

If the answer is again "the thought 'I' points to this and that", then have a look again.
Does the letter "I" really point to anything?
Or is it just another thought suggesting: "I has anything to do with this and that"?


How can the ltter "I" by itself point to anything?
"O" is "O". That's it. The end.
"I" is "I". That's it. The end.

What exactly does "I" have to do with the words "EXISTENCE, OF BEING, OF PRESENCE"???

1 = 1
1 ≠ 472193757

"I" = "I"
"I" ≠ "EXISTENCE, OF BEING, OF PRESENCE"

You see?

obviously "I" is hiding

In addition, please write down five more assumptions, that currently appear as "true".
Five things, that clearly do not exist, where there's a belief in their existience.
Anything!
Anything that cannot be verified in present experience.
"A brain does things", "There is life on the other side of the planet", "I have been born in year xy".
Anything that comes up.

[mitzuko]

You need to understand the difference between "thinking" and looking at things as they are.

Yes, absolutely.
and even realizing and remembering it all the time, that we are really only talking about what is right now in the ONLY experience of the senses.
I know it's a simple thing, but at the same time it's also the hardest thing to "accept", I can not "believe" that it's just this, that it's really just this, it seems impossible, too "simple" and so I think, in fact I'm sure "I did not understand something or do something wrong."
and from this "trampoline" REstart the mental carousel every time.

If you ever want to get this over with, you need to stop making assumptions and start looking at things as they are!!!

I want it and I want it with all my heart, I "only" find it difficult to understand and to find the way, and for this I thank you once again for your patience, kindness and generosity!

(....but can still POINTING to something real...)
We can say that for the moment.
Then please, on this basis, have a look!!!
The thought "tree" points to a tree. Okay.
The thought "smartphone" points to a smartphone. Okay.

What does the thought "O" point to?
What does the thought "I" point to?

if I look from a level of "labeling things" (where "tree" indicates "tree") then the word "I" continue to indicate this body

(....but this "I" in the thought POINT to a feeling of EXISTENCE, OF BEING, OF PRESENCE....)
If the answer is again "the thought 'I' points to this and that", then have a look again.
Does the letter "I" really point to anything?
Or is it just another thought suggesting: "I has anything to do with this and that"?


How can the ltter "I" by itself point to anything?

but if I look from this perspective then no word has anything to do with anything in the present experience.
they are all only labels

What exactly does "I" have to do with the words "EXISTENCE, OF BEING, OF PRESENCE"???

the word, nothing