I feel ready want truth without comprimise

[majiinx]

I want you to LOOK..can you find anyone or anything that is “holding onto an imaginary self? Or is simply an appearing thought that is suggesting this?

There is nothing holding on to anything. Just the thought of an imaginary self-holding onto itself. And yet in all of this, there is awareness of all this happening.

Does colour itself know anything about an imaginary self?
Does sound itself know anything about an imaginary self?
Does taste itself know anything about an imaginary self?
Does smell itself know anything about an imaginary self?
Does sensation itself know anything about an imaginary self?
Does thought itself know anything about an imaginary self?

Feelings, sensations, perceptions, and thoughts happen independently of a self. They are simply happenings. And yet there is awareness of all these things. But nothing that be can found being aware?

There are thoughts appearing about an imaginary self, but can an imaginary self-be found?

The self can never be found, it seems to arise spontaneously and disappears as soon as I look for it. And yet in doing these exercises I cannot help but shake. What is actually performing these exercises, what is looking, what is aware of these things? I Keep looking and find nothing and yet there is always the awareness of these things. This awareness seems to pervade all these things and yet it is completely independent of these things.

Where is this "I" that is supposedly identifying with a thought about being an "

It is nowhere, it vanishes as soon as it is observed.

Thought says that the foot is ‘down there’. So presumably you are above your foot. Where are you? Sit quietly, close your eyes, take a few breaths and locate where you feel yourself to be. Locate yourself vertically in the body, horizontally to the left or right, and depth, how far in. Feel how big you are, where you reside. Then point with a finger to ‘you’. Open your eyes, where is your finger pointing?

I cannot find the I. Nor can I find how big I am, when sitting with my eyes closed, observing actual experience. There is just awareness by itself. It is only the thought of a body that creates a boundary to this awareness. The thought of "My arm is here, my leg is here" But in actual experience, there is just feelings and thoughts being noticed by awareness.

What exactly is it that is “falsely identifying with the story”? Describe this someone/something to me in precise detail.

Within actual experience, there is absolutely nothing. Just the thought "I have to realize no self" but this thought points to no-one. When being aware of actual experience and fully immersed in actual experience there is just awareness of things with nothing behind it, nobody seemingly observing it. And yet there is this great confusion when these moments of clarity come. When actual experience is being had there is this nagging thought that cannot seem to be shaken. I can recognize that nothing is there, but then this ignorance seems to come back and with that ignorance is this false identification with a mind and body.

"I" find myself in this paradox, "I" find ABSOLUTELY nothing. And yet this seeker keeps coming back and taking over and cannot seem to be gotten rid of. I find myself in this bind that I cannot escape even thought I recognize that nobody is in any bind and nobody needs to escape anything. There is simply this great confusion over the whole situation.

[forgetmenot]

Hello Eric,

I want you to LOOK..can you find anyone or anything that is “holding onto an imaginary self? Or is simply an appearing thought that is suggesting this?

There is nothing holding on to anything. Just the thought of an imaginary self-holding onto itself. And yet in all of this, there is awareness of all this happening.

Is this awareness something separate from all the rest?
Noticing happens - how do you know awareness is what notices?
Does awareness have a shape, a location, a weight? Can you point to this awareness?
Do you ever experiences awareness as anything distinct from whatever is being ‘awared’?
Can you find anything at all that is called "awareness", or do you just find coloursoundsmellsensationtastehought?

There are thoughts appearing about an imaginary self, but can an imaginary self-be found?

The self can never be found, it seems to arise spontaneously and disappears as soon as I look for it. And yet in doing these exercises I cannot help but shake. What is actually performing these exercises, what is looking, what is aware of these things? I Keep looking and find nothing and yet there is always the awareness of these things. This awareness seems to pervade all these things and yet it is completely independent of these things.

Let’s have a look at the idea of an observer, of an ‘awarer’.

With eyes closed, there is the experience of 'blackness'. There may a bright light, a red glow, sparkly bits or cloudy flecks appearing and disappearing - It really doesn't matter about the specifics. We are just noticing ‘blackness’.

1) With eyes closed, can you confirm that what is experienced is simply AE of colour labelled ‘black’?
2) Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than seeing ‘black’?
3) Can what is seeing ‘black’ found?
4) Can a pair of eyes, an 'I' / 'me', a person be found that is ‘seeing’ ‘black’?

Is there anything that is witnessing the colour labelled ‘black’? Or is there just 'black’ to be found?

Look very carefully. Where does ‘seeing’ end and colour begin? Can a dividing line between ‘seeing’ and colour be found? Or is there just seeing/colour?

Can a 'see-er' ever be found in 'what is being seen' – AE colour?

If that is all, and no INHERENT SEE-ER found . . . would anything that is suggested as the see-er be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

Okay….then open the eyes and look around.

Is there a difference between the ‘black’ when eyes are closed and ‘colour’ when eyes are open or are they both simply the appearance of colour?

Is there anything that is witnessing colour? Or is 'seeing' and colour one and the same?

Thought says that the foot is ‘down there’. So presumably you are above your foot. Where are you? Sit quietly, close your eyes, take a few breaths and locate where you feel yourself to be. Locate yourself vertically in the body, horizontally to the left or right, and depth, how far in. Feel how big you are, where you reside. Then point with a finger to ‘you’. Open your eyes, where is your finger pointing?

I cannot find the I. Nor can I find how big I am, when sitting with my eyes closed, observing actual experience. There is just awareness by itself. It is only the thought of a body that creates a boundary to this awareness. The thought of "My arm is here, my leg is here" But in actual experience, there is just feelings and thoughts being noticed by awareness.

When doing the exercise, was there a specific place where sensation seemed to be the strongest. And if so, where was it located?

"I" find myself in this paradox, "I" find ABSOLUTELY nothing. And yet this seeker keeps coming back and taking over and cannot seem to be gotten rid of. I find myself in this bind that I cannot escape even thought I recognize that nobody is in any bind and nobody needs to escape anything. There is simply this great confusion over the whole situation.

What exactly is it that is trying to get “rid of the seeker”? How can something that doesn’t exist be gotten rid of?

There are thoughts appearing that infer there is a seeker. If nothing can be found that is a person/self/seeker, then how can there possibly be one? So the story of there being a seeker keeps reappearing. A story that is made up of thoughts. Just because another thought appears saying “but there is a strong feeling that there is a me who is seeking”, means what exactly? So the show is showing up as a paradox, however the show is never confused about what it actually is.

LOOKING is not the same as seeking. Seeking is always towards something that is not present, or trying to get away from something that is present. Looking is investigating what is present; it's for no reason other than itself. It's done for its own sake. If you're expecting something from LOOKING, then you're not LOOKING, you're seeking for what you expect LOOKING will give you.

Love, Kay

[majiinx]

I will need a few days on this one as well. Everything is just moving in and settling in so quickly. Or moving out, I don't know how to explain it, but I am sure you understand :). I will try and share the aha moments, but I am just letting life be spontaneous, or better "I" am moving out of the way and letting it unfold naturally :)

[forgetmenot]

Lovely Eric! Take the time you need :)

Love, Kay

[majiinx]

Is this awareness something separate from all the rest?

Not it is not.

Noticing happens - how do you know awareness is what notices?

It seems as if noticing simply happens, independent of someone noticing something. It seems like awareness and the noticing of it arise spontaneously, without any reason. It just happens on its own, even the material world seems to arise and fall. I noticed this in yoga class today,

I came in distracted in thought because of all the amazing things happening in my life. And I had my best sales day at work yet so there was this bliss and excitement that arose from it. Then the thinking mind came back in like a tsunami, trying to imagine ways we can continue to make it better. It seems like the mind comes into being and plays these stories to pull its way back into the space of awareness. So anyway, I kept getting swept in thought, to the point where the material world was gone and all there was, was this story about a possible future playing itself out. And yet as I was pulled out of this state in the middle of the hot yoga classes, I noticed I was still doing the asanas even while inside the mind. It is as if the mind instantly created a scenario in which I was doing yoga the entire time, uninterrupted by anything.

I know it came out a little strange but I hope it makes sense to you. Cause honestly I feel like I know nothing anymore.

Does awareness have a shape, a location, a weight? Can you point to this awareness?

No, nothing, it simply cannot seem to be found, and yet it is ever present in all experience?

Do you ever experiences awareness as anything distinct from whatever is being ‘awared’?

No, it is unchanged and indifferent. It is as aware of the highest bliss and the deepest pain, it makes no difference.

Can you find anything at all that is called "awareness", or do you just find coloursoundsmellsensationtastehought?

I find nothing, just whatever color, smell, sound, sensation, taste and thought is going on at that time. If that makes any sense?

1) With eyes closed, can you confirm that what is experienced is simply AE of colour labelled ‘black’?

Yes I can confirm that.

2) Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than seeing ‘black’?

No, just the AE of seeing the color black.

3) Can what is seeing ‘black’ found?

Not it cannot

4) Can a pair of eyes, an 'I' / 'me', a person be found that is ‘seeing’ ‘black’?

No

Is there anything that is witnessing the colour labelled ‘black’? Or is there just 'black’ to be found?

No, there is just black, that is all.

Look very carefully. Where does ‘seeing’ end and colour begin? Can a dividing line between ‘seeing’ and colour be found? Or is there just seeing/colour?

There is just seeing color, that is all. Nothing seeing it.

Can a 'see-er' ever be found in 'what is being seen' – AE colour?

No, it cannot. Only the thought "I am seeing this", which falls just as fast as it arises.

If that is all, and no INHERENT SEE-ER found . . . would anything that is suggested as the see-er be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

It is just a thought an idea, that is apparent. It is only known by the thought of itself which is temporary. And both reappears and disappears spontaneously. But it is not perminent and not real, just an idea.

Is there a difference between the ‘black’ when eyes are closed and ‘colour’ when eyes are open or are they both simply the appearance of colour?

Just the appearances of color, nothing to it.

Is there anything that is witnessing colour? Or is 'seeing' and colour one and the same?

They go together, for what is seeing without something to see and what is color without something to see it. Wait that is a contradiction? When closely examined, there is no self-doing any seeing. And yet there is color being seen but it is seen by nothing. This is quite a paradox. There is this confusion and yet I cannot find anybody that is confused. So the feeling of confusion and thought of someone being confused to seem to create each other, it is like the chicken and the egg arrived at the same time. I am not sure if that made sense, nothing really makes sense anymore.

When doing the exercise, was there a specific place where sensation seemed to be the strongest. And if so, where was it located?

The sensation seemed strongest from the brow to the crown of the head. There was always tension in the solar plexus and legs. But nothing that can be pointed to that can be identified as "I"

What exactly is it that is trying to get “rid of the seeker”? How can something that doesn’t exist be gotten rid of?

That is actually really funny to me! For what seems like a week or two, its as if there is nobody seeking anything, just life unfolding organically in every aspect. Then suddenly this though "I need to get rid of the self' arose. But there was no attachment to it, and when directly looked at, just disappeared. It is like a bubble. It contains nothing inside it and when touched it simply pops and will never reappear. That is not to say more bubbles like it will not arise, because they will. However, no two bubbles can ever possibly be the same on the surface. But when directly "touched" they all pop just the same and contain nothing.

[forgetmenot]

Hello Eric

Noticing happens - how do you know awareness is what notices?

It seems as if noticing simply happens, independent of someone noticing something. It seems like awareness and the noticing of it arise spontaneously, without any reason. It just happens on its own, even the material world seems to arise and fall. I noticed this in yoga class today,

Yes…lovely! So experience is appearing as the story of noticing in that moment. This arises and subsides like every thing in the dream.

I noticed I was still doing the asanas even while inside the mind. It is as if the mind instantly created a scenario in which I was doing yoga the entire time, uninterrupted by anything.

It can be likened to being ‘done through’ as opposed to anything doing the doing. However being ‘done through’ is a thorny pointer as there would have to be a separate something that something is being done through.

I know it came out a little strange but I hope it makes sense to you. Cause honestly I feel like I know nothing anymore.

Best way to be. That way you are willing to look at everything that appears moment to moment with 'fresh eyes' instead of through eyes that filter through the past.

Does awareness have a shape, a location, a weight? Can you point to this awareness?

No, nothing, it simply cannot seem to be found, and yet it is ever present in all experience?

Experience is not IN experience. Experience is appearing as every ‘thing’ but does not become any of those ‘things’. Every ‘thing’ is ‘made of’ experience.

Let’s use gold as a metaphor for experience/THIS. Gold SEEMS to appear in many forms, ie rings, ingots, bracelets, earrings, nuggets, necklaces, coins etc. Does the form make the gold or the gold is the form? In other words can a ring or bracelet etc appear on its own without the gold? Does the gold become something else just because it seems to appear as a ring, or a necklace or an ingot etc? Or does gold remains as gold no matter what it appears as? Is gold separate from what it appears as? Is the form of a ring separate to the gold it is made from? Or are they both the same thing? Does the gold change, or does it still remain as gold…no matter if it is a ring, necklace, ear rings etc? If you melt down the ring and then make it into a bracelet…does the substance it is made from change or disappear? NO. Only the form changes…but the substance never does. So, is experience/THIS separate from what it seemingly appears as?

Can you find anything at all that is called "awareness", or do you just find coloursoundsmellsensationtastehought?

I find nothing, just whatever color, smell, sound, sensation, taste and thought is going on at that time. If that makes any sense?

You are missing what I am pointing to. There is no separation. There is no sound AND thought AND colour AND sensation AND taste AND smell. The ‘AND’ points to experience being divided. Experience is NOT divided. It is seamless, whole and complete. It is only thought that divides experience into many different ‘things’.

There is ‘knowing’ (experience) of/as colour, sound, smell, taste, thought, sensation – which are known. Can a dividing line be found between ‘knowing’ and ‘known’? Can there be a ‘knowing’ without a ‘known’ or a ‘known’ with ‘knowing’?

Coloursoundsmellsensationtastehought = experience/THIS, they are one and the same.

Look very carefully. Where does ‘seeing’ end and colour begin? Can a dividing line between ‘seeing’ and colour be found? Or is there just seeing/colour?

There is just seeing color, that is all. Nothing seeing it.

Yes, seeing and knowing are one and the same. Seeing of colour and seeing of seeing are one and the same = colour

Is there anything that is witnessing colour? Or is 'seeing' and colour one and the same?

They go together, for what is seeing without something to see and what is color without something to see it. Wait that is a contradiction? When closely examined, there is no self-doing any seeing. And yet there is color being seen but it is seen by nothing. This is quite a paradox. There is this confusion and yet I cannot find anybody that is confused. So the feeling of confusion and thought of someone being confused to seem to create each other, it is like the chicken and the egg arrived at the same time. I am not sure if that made sense, nothing really makes sense anymore.

Great observation. Thought infers that there is someone feeling confused. So confusion is showing up in the show that is never confused about what it seemingly appears as.

How is it known that there are many different colours. Look at this question carefully.
And if you ignore the label ‘colour’ what do you find?

When doing the exercise, was there a specific place where sensation seemed to be the strongest. And if so, where was it located?

The sensation seemed strongest from the brow to the crown of the head. There was always tension in the solar plexus and legs. But nothing that can be pointed to that can be identified as "I"

Okay, so let’s explore this. Please IGNORE all thoughts and images of ‘head’ and ‘fingers’ and just answer from actual experience.

Press a finger down onto the top of the ‘head’.
Notice what is actually present.
Is it a head, or is it just a sensation labelled ‘pressure’ and a story ABOUT a head?

Do the same with a finger on each side of the head.
Is a head actually found, or are there just sensations again?
And is there anything between the pressure points, or is it just a thought that says there must be something between them?

It is generally believed that thoughts are coming from the head. When we try to trace back the origin of a thought, it is often believed that it's coming from the forehead, because the attention automatically goes to the sensation of the forehead. Investigate this carefully as often as you can throughout the day.

What is the forehead in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image (of a forehead), right?

So, can a thought come from a sensation?
Can a thought come from a mental image?

Have a very deep look here... the forehead is one of the 'residence' of the SENSE of self. Or rather say, the sensation that is labelled as forehead is believed to be one of the location of the sense of self.

What exactly is it that is trying to get “rid of the seeker”? How can something that doesn’t exist be gotten rid of?

That is actually really funny to me! For what seems like a week or two, its as if there is nobody seeking anything, just life unfolding organically in every aspect. Then suddenly this though "I need to get rid of the self' arose. But there was no attachment to it, and when directly looked at, just disappeared. It is like a bubble. It contains nothing inside it and when touched it simply pops and will never reappear. That is not to say more bubbles like it will not arise, because they will. However, no two bubbles can ever possibly be the same on the surface. But when directly "touched" they all pop just the same and contain nothing.

That’s terrific to hear, Eric! So thoughts are losing their Velcro and you are becoming aware of all stories. :)

Love, Kay

[majiinx]

There is ‘knowing’ (experience) of/as colour, sound, smell, taste, thought, sensation – which are known. Can a dividing line be found between ‘knowing’ and ‘known’? Can there be a ‘knowing’ without a ‘known’ or a ‘known’ with ‘knowing’?

No, individually they cannot be separate because they are dependant on each other. The line between the know and the knowing cannot be found because it simply doesn't exist. They are not divided from each other, their essential nature seems to be the same?

How is it known that there are many different colours. Look at this question carefully.
And if you ignore the label ‘colour’ what do you find?

Is the thought the dividing line? It seems like when being within the actual experience that no lines are even looked for. it is only thought that creates the divides.

Is it a head, or is it just a sensation labelled ‘pressure’ and a story ABOUT a head?

Only the story of an arm, pressing a finger onto the top of a head that is part of a body. The pressure seems to be a byproduct of this thought?

Is a head actually found, or are there just sensations again?
And is there anything between the pressure points, or is it just a thought that says there must be something between them?

It all seems to be just thought, even when performing these exercises as you suggest, they are constantly changing and different. They do not remain consistent even when immersed in them, everything just seems to rise and fall. Including the sensations. Everything seems to come from the thought of it in some endless circle, that seems to have no beginning or end.

What is the forehead in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image (of a forehead), right?

It seems to be like a screen of some sort. But that's an idea too it seems? The forehead never existed until it became a thought. And the thought of a forehead is just a label. No forehead can be found without a skull, which cannot be found without a skeleton which cannot be found as a body...etc... and that can go on and on and on forever it just seems. Because all thoughts of things are just imaginary labels that point to a separate part of something. It is like the minds way of trying to know something that it cannot know because it cannot simply conceptualize it. Not sure if that even made sense really but that's what came out.

So, can a thought come from a sensation?
Can a thought come from a mental image?

A thought can come from anything really. A thought is just a dividing line for what cannot be divided, is that right?

Again sorry for the long responses, time seems to be going so slow because I am able to really take it all in now. But at the same time, it is going super quickly, I don't know how to explain anymore. There is a very small part of me that thinks I might be going crazy. But I realize that it is not it, I just cannot simply seem to find myself. And I'm not really that concerned with looking anymore either.

It really is liberating, the separate self-comes but as you pointed out, there is no velcro to hold it together. So naturally, it simply drops with nothing to catch it. The thought of the separate self is the only things that can hold it together and it is on a very thin thread that keeps snapping anytime it comes which sends it falling away. The self-has no place to take refuge anymore, it had found its refuge in this stick fort of a mind which blows over with even the gentlest breeze. There seems to be no magic moment that can describe it because it cannot be found. We seek magic and yet it is right in front of us, in every present moment. Life is this continuous miracle that bursts before our eyes with no rhyme, reason or method. It simply is, there just aren't ways to put it into words, every attempt to do so fails so pitifully to do so.

So for example, a book of mine that I really liked had some scenes that had brought tears to my eyes. And as beautifully and masterfully as those stories were told. They did not contain the whole actual experience as it would unfold before our eyes. How could a human mind possibly describe all that exists in just a single moment with its imaginary dividing lines? It would be incomprehensible to do so because it simply cannot be done because, by the time you start thinking about it, it has gone and changed in some way, shape or form. It is just unexplainable, yet looking at it without thought it becomes quite clear and really makes perfect sense.

I don't know what is happening, I don't even know where the question comes from?

[forgetmenot]

Hi Eric,

What a beautiful post…and yes, what you are saying makes sense to me; so no…you aren’t going crazy! Isn’t that good news! (chuckling).

There is ‘knowing’ (experience) of/as colour, sound, smell, taste, thought, sensation – which are known. Can a dividing line be found between ‘knowing’ and ‘known’? Can there be a ‘knowing’ without a ‘known’ or a ‘known’?

No, individually they cannot be separate because they are dependant on each other. The line between the know and the knowing cannot be found because it simply doesn't exist. They are not divided from each other, their essential nature seems to be the same?

Yes…All ‘appearances’ are appearances of THIS/experience, but THIS is not an ‘appearance ‘ of anything, as there is no thing for THIS to be an appearance of. It is only thought that divides THIS into many different ‘things’, but every ‘thing’ is made of the same substance ie THIS/experience itself and therefore is one and the same.



Thought says that this is a beautiful sunrise. If you ignore thought completely, all there is is THIS/experience exactly as it is.

However, thought either points to AE or to thought about thoughts. So in that sense, not everything is story.It looks like it could be until you look a little closer.

If thought says, for example, that you saw a beautiful 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 ‘beautiful 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 thought refers to as a 'sunrise' is what is actually appearing now. Thought either points to actual experience as you presently find it...or it is pointing to thoughts about actual experience which is not the current experience which then equates to just story...thought fluff/imagination – thoughts about thoughts.
Can you see this?

How is it known that there are many different colours. Look at this question carefully.
And if you ignore the label ‘colour’ what do you find?

Is the thought the dividing line? It seems like when being within the actual experience that no lines are even looked for. it is only thought that creates the divides.

Exactly. So are there many different colourS or simply colour?
And if you ignore the label ‘colour’ what do you find? The following exercise may help you with this question.

If you look at a table, and let say it is the colour brown. Now totally ignore the label ‘table’ and you are then left with the label ‘brown’. Totally ignore the label ‘brown’ and you are left with the label ‘colour’. Now ignore the label ‘colour’ and what are you left with?

Is it a head, or is it just a sensation labelled ‘pressure’ and a story ABOUT a head?
Only the story of an arm, pressing a finger onto the top of a head that is part of a

body. The pressure seems to be a byproduct of this thought?

Hmm…read the exercise again and try it again please. The purpose was for you to see if an "I" can be found in the sensation referred to as the 'head'. (This is where you pointed, when closing the eyes and pointing to where the self seems to be in the body).

Okay, so let’s explore this. Please IGNORE all thoughts as well as thoughts and images of ‘head’ and ‘fingers’ and just answer from actual experience.

Press a finger down onto the top of the ‘head’.
Notice what is actually present.
Is it a head, or is it just a sensation labelled ‘pressure’ and a story ABOUT a head?

Do the same with a finger on each side of the head.
Is a head actually found, or are there just sensations again?
And is there anything between the pressure points, or is it just a thought that says there must be something between them?

What is the forehead in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image (of a forehead), right?

It seems to be like a screen of some sort. But that's an idea too it seems? The forehead never existed until it became a thought. And the thought of a forehead is just a label. No forehead can be found without a skull, which cannot be found without a skeleton which cannot be found as a body...etc... and that can go on and on and on forever it just seems. Because all thoughts of things are just imaginary labels that point to a separate part of something. It is like the minds way of trying to know something that it cannot know because it cannot simply conceptualize it. Not sure if that even made sense really but that's what came out.

Yes, exactly, however there is a point to this exercise - to see if an "I" can be found in the head. It was also about looking at the idea of thoughts coming from the head…ie that thinking happens in a head/forehead. That is why I gave you the head exercise first, then the forehead exercise.

Okay, let’s look more carefully at the idea of the ‘forehead’

Step 1.
Close the eyes, take in a couple of breaths to settle the dust and focus your attention for several minutes on the location thought calls the ‘forehead’. Put all thoughts to the side and just pay attention to what is actual experience.

Did you notice the sensation? It may be subtle when you first start to look, but keep your focus there and just become aware of the sensation.

Step 2.
Now I want you to keep your eyes closed and keep your attention on the forehead and start ‘thinking’….notice the thoughts.

Did you notice the sensation in the forehead that seemingly comes with the thinking?

Step 3.
Now open the eyes and notice thinking again for a few minutes. Then start to concentrate on an issue you are trying to solve, or a maths problem and notice what is actually happening.

Where does the attention go, when ‘thinking’ is happening? Does it seem to go to the head/forehead automatically?
Did you notice the sensation labelled ‘concentration’ that seems to happen in the forehead when ‘thinking’ appears? This is what gives the idea that thinking is happening and is happening in a head, or more specifically, the forehead.
Let me know what you found.

Once you have done that exercise the following questions will then make sense.

So, can a thought come from a sensation?
Can a thought come from a mental image?

Again sorry for the long responses, time seems to be going so slow because I am able to really take it all in now. But at the same time, it is going super quickly, I don't know how to explain anymore. There is a very small part of me that thinks I might be going crazy. But I realize that it is not it, I just cannot simply seem to find myself. And I'm not really that concerned with looking anymore either.

That is marvellous! However, we will continue investigating to ensure that there is no place left unturned where the seeming separate self is ‘hidden’.

It really is liberating, the separate self-comes but as you pointed out, there is no velcro to hold it together. So naturally, it simply drops with nothing to catch it. The thought of the separate self is the only things that can hold it together and it is on a very thin thread that keeps snapping anytime it comes which sends it falling away. The self-has no place to take refuge anymore, it had found its refuge in this stick fort of a mind which blows over with even the gentlest breeze. There seems to be no magic moment that can describe it because it cannot be found. We seek magic and yet it is right in front of us, in every present moment. Life is this continuous miracle that bursts before our eyes with no rhyme, reason or method. It simply is, there just aren't ways to put it into words, every attempt to do so fails so pitifully to do so.

Beautifully expressed.

Love, Kay

[majiinx]

Can you see this?

The present still eludes me, as much as I think I see it, the thought of being in it, actually obscures it. It is like i have forgotten how to have an actual experience, as it is, without thought dividing it. It still exists as a concept, how can this be reconciled. I feel like I am talking strange, yet you somehow know what I mean. This is reassuring, I just don't know who is reassured.

Exactly. So are there many different colourS or simply colour?
And if you ignore the label ‘colour’ what do you find? The following exercise may help you with this question.

If you look at a table and let say it is the colour brown. Now totally ignore the label ‘table’ and you are then left with the label ‘brown’. Totally ignore the label ‘brown’ and you are left with the label ‘colour’. Now ignore the label ‘colour’ and what are you left with?

Just a part of whatever is going on at that moment. Everything in it, every part of it is intimate with it. It is only a series of separate things when looked at by a separate self. Without a self, everything just is, it just all goes together perfectly somehow. It is only the separate self that sees itself as broken and in need of fixing. I don't even understand this separate self-idea anymore, it makes absolutely no sense. It cannot be found anywhere, if that is the case, then how can any of their labels be found?

Is it a head, or is it just a sensation labeled ‘pressure’ and a story ABOUT a head?

Without thought, nothing is suggested at all. It was simply one happening with too much to really describe. For instance I have music on and a fan. When in, direct experience there doesn't seem to be a separation between what is seen and what is heard and what is felt. It all just goes together. the story begins with the thought of it. I don't have a head until a think about it, or anything for that matter. Ahhhh ! because there is no "I" to possess a head, so how could it be found?

Is a head actually found, or are there just sensations again?
And is there anything between the pressure points, or is it just a thought that says there must be something between them?

Ahh, it is just the thought and sensation dancing together. Ahh, sensations and thoughts always seem to go together huh? They are not separate events, they fit together like two puzzle pieces. How is this typing just happening, seemingly on its own, independent of thought? Its only thought that gives it pause.

Where does the attention go, when ‘thinking’ is happening? Does it seem to go to the head/forehead automatically?
Did you notice the sensation labeled ‘concentration’ that seems to happen in the forehead when ‘thinking’ appears? This is what gives the idea that thinking is happening and is happening in a head, or more specifically, the forehead.
Let me know what you found.

Hmmm, its weird it is like they are cause and effect for each other. Like the head, didn't exist until the thought of it came into being. Hmmm I don't know, why does the space between now and the moment you asked me to describe "thinking" feel so long? By the time I look at what you are asking me for, it is gone, along with the thought of it.

So, can a thought come from a sensation?
Can a thought come from a mental image?

Yes, a thought can come from anything, it is nothing but a very distance observation and explanation of something so far away from it, that it has no way of putting it into words.


I'm not really understanding anything, but that doesn't really seem that important. Because what is going on around it is completely unchanged by its thoughts about it. It just goes on its own.

[forgetmenot]

Hello Eric,

You are not looking therefore you don’t actually answer the questions I pose. We are starting to go round in circles, and this always indicates that you don’t know what looking is.

So that you know what LOOKING is, let’s go back to the apple exercise but a more indepth exercise. Please READ the questions thoroughly.

If you have an ‘apple’ or any other piece of fruit or even a piece of cheese or chocolate will do….go get it and then place it in front of you on the table.

Now LOOK carefully.

1. The image of the ‘apple’ is the actual experience of colour and NOT the AE of an apple. The shape referred to as ‘apple’ is just different shades and patterns of colour. Ignore ALL thoughts and ‘mental’ images that appear of and about the ‘apple’ and just focus on the colour.

Does the colour itself suggest in any way that it knows anything about an ‘apple’? Or is it just simply AE of colour?
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that the colour appearing is that of an ‘apple’?

2. Now, pick up the ‘apple’ and close the eyes. Ignore ALL thoughts and ‘mental’ images that appear of and about the ‘apple’ and of ‘hands’ and just focus on the sensation.

Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is an apple, and that it knows anything about an ‘apple’? Or is it just simply AE of sensation?
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that it is the sensation has anything to do with an ‘apple’?

3. Now, take a bite of the ‘apple’. Ignore ALL thoughts and ‘mental’ images that appear of and about the ‘apple’ and just focus on the taste.

Does taste itself suggest in any way that it knows anything about an apple? Or is there just simply AE of taste?
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that it is the taste of an ‘apple’?

4. Now, have a smell of the ‘apple’. Ignore ALL thoughts and ‘mental’ images that appear of and about the ‘apple’ and just focus on the smell.

Does smell itself suggest in any way that it knows anything about an apple? Or is there just simple AE of smell?
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that it is the smell of an ‘apple’?

5. Now, listen to the sound of the ‘crunch of an apple’. Ignore ALL thoughts and ‘mental’ images that appear of and about the ‘apple’ and just focus on the sound.

Does the sound itself suggest in any way that it knows anything about an apple? Or is there just simple AE of sound?
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that it is the sound is that of an ‘apple’?

6. So now look at the label ‘apple and the thought “I am looking at, and eating an apple”.

Does the label itself or the thought itself know anything about an ‘apple’? Or are they just simply AE of label/thought?

The label ‘apple’ is the AE of thought and not the AE of an apple
The image labelled ‘apple’ is AE of colour and not the AE of an apple
The smell labelled ‘apple’ is AE of smell and not the AE of an apple
The taste labelled ‘apple’ is AE of taste and not the AE of an apple
The sound labelled ‘crunchy apple’ is AE of sound and not the AE of an apple
The sensation labelled as ‘hard, round apple’ is the AE of sensation and not the AE of an apple

Thought overlays actual experience with concepts. An example being the AE of colour is being labelled as an 'apple'.

So is there really actual experience of an ‘apple’, or what is actually appearing ie what the actual experience is, is colour, sensation, taste, smell, sound, which thought then labels and describes as an 'apple'?
In other words, is an apple actually known or only thoughts about an apple are known?

Taste labelled ‘apple’ is known
Colour labelled ‘apple’ is known
Sensation labelled ‘apple’ is known (when apple is touched)
Smell labelled ‘apple’ is known
Thought about/of an ‘apple’ is known
However, is an apple actually known?

Kay

[majiinx]

Does the colour itself suggest in any way that it knows anything about an ‘apple’? Or is it just simply AE of colour?
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that the colour appearing is that of an ‘apple’?

It is just the actual experience of color. See this is where I get caught up, I know how to look, the problem is when I go to answer the question the mind arises and this confusion settles in and I don't know how to answer the question. When I look at an apple without thought and preconception I cannot find anything to suggest that it is an apple.

Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is an apple, and that it knows anything about an ‘apple’? Or is it just simply AE of sensation?
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that it is the sensation has anything to do with an ‘apple’?

Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is an apple, and that it knows anything about an ‘apple’? Or is it just simply AE of sensation?
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that it is the sensation has anything to do with an ‘apple’?

Just the AE of sensation. There is nothing in the sensation itself that suggestions I am holding an apple.

Does taste itself suggest in any way that it knows anything about an apple? Or is there just simply AE of taste?
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that it is the taste of an ‘apple’?

Just AE of taste. Without thought, nothing is suggested at all.

Does smell itself suggest in any way that it knows anything about an apple? Or is there just simple AE of smell?
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that it is the smell of an ‘apple’?

Just the AE of smell, no indications of the smell being that of an apple.

Does the sound itself suggest in any way that it knows anything about an apple? Or is there just simple AE of sound?
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that it is the sound is that of an ‘apple’?

It is the same as above, just the AE of sound.

Does the label itself or the thought itself know anything about an ‘apple’? Or are they just simply AE of label/thought?

It is just AE of label/though, Apple is just a label and does not suggest anything is known of the object.

So is there really actual experience of an ‘apple’, or what is actually appearing ie what the actual experience is, is colour, sensation, taste, smell, sound, which thought then labels and describes as an 'apple'?
In other words, is an apple actually known or only thoughts about an apple are known?

Just the thoughts are known, eating an apple is an actual experience and what we "know" of the apple are simply just thoughts and labels. Thought just cuts the experience up into separate pieces, but they all go together. But it does not need to be understood, eating an apple just is what it is, everything goes together. The colorsoundtastesmellsensation are not separate parts, they all go together as the actual experience of an apple.

However, is an apple actually known?

Nothing is known, how can the mind know what it cannot experience. It's like the mind just recaps actual experience but can never actually describe it. It is like listening to a boxing match on the radio, how can that actual experience be conveyed through words, it is not possible.

My issue right now is that I am able to bring myself into actual experience, but cannot seem to stay there it is like being pulled back into the world of the mind. And then I find myself as a separate self again even though I can never find one when looking.

[forgetmenot]

Hello Eric,

So is there really actual experience of an ‘apple’, or what is actually appearing ie what the actual experience is, is colour, sensation, taste, smell, sound, which thought then labels and describes as an 'apple'?
In other words, is an apple actually known or only thoughts about an apple are known?

Just the thoughts are known, eating an apple is an actual experience and what we "know" of the apple are simply just thoughts and labels.

How is “eating an apple” actual experience? What is the AE of “eating an apple”?

However, is an apple actually known?

Nothing is known, how can the mind know what it cannot experience. It's like the mind just recaps actual experience but can never actually describe it. It is like listening to a boxing match on the radio, how can that actual experience be conveyed through words, it is not possible.

Sound, colour, thought, smell, taste and sensation are known. How can they not be known? Are you not aware of sound, colour, smell, sensation, taste and thought?

My issue right now is that I am able to bring myself into actual experience, but cannot seem to stay there it is like being pulled back into the world of the mind. And then I find myself as a separate self again even though I can never find one when looking.

There is no “staying in actual experience”…what does that even mean? What does it look like to “stay” in AE? Looking is simply noticing what actually IS in the moment. ie sound, thought, colour, smell, sensation, sound. Everything is AE except the content of thought as thought, in and of itself does NOT contain any experience. If thought contained experience you would be able to taste the word ‘sweet’ and when the word ‘wet’ appeared it would be wet!

Just because attention seems to be on AE of thought more so than sound, colour etc, doesn’t mean you are not aware of AE. Thought is actual experience.

Love, Kay

[majiinx]

ow is “eating an apple” actual experience? What is the AE of “eating an apple”?

I don't know how to describe it?

Sound, colour, thought, smell, taste and sensation are known. How can they not be known? Are you not aware of sound, colour, smell, sensation, taste and thought?

So does that mean awareness just knows? And simply doesn't require any explanations or interpretations? Or are awareness and knowing the same thing?

I know I have been running around in circles, I hope you understand that I am going at this with every fiber of my being. But I spent a great deal of my life, living exclusively in the mind, that I am having a hard time seeing through its illusion. But I greatly appreciate the time and diligence. Thank you :)

[forgetmenot]

Hello Eric,

I am not going to give you the answers Eric. You have to look for yourself and realise the answer. If I tell you what you want to know, you might as well go back and continue reading books and listening to gurus. Your questions will answer themselves as we move through the exploration. All I want for now is for you to become aware of actual experience. This exploration is about discovering that what you thought you were – a separate person, is not the case. This exploration is not about discovering what you are, although by seeing what you are not, it becomes clear to what you are, however we are not about dropping one identity only t o pick up another. There is no thing to identify with.

How is “eating an apple” actual experience? What is the AE of “eating an apple”?

I don't know how to describe it?

??? Since an apple is not known...then how could it possibly be eaten and by what exactly? There is no person who is eating an apple.

Taste appears and thought describes it as ‘apple’
Colour appears and thought describes it as ‘apple’
Sensation appears which thought describes as ‘smooth apple skin’
Smell appears which thought describes as ‘apple’
Sound appears which thought describes as ‘eating crunchy apple’
Thought appear about taste, colour, sensation, smell and sound being and ‘apple’ and what an apple is, does etc.

HOWEVER IS AN APPLE ACTUALLY KNOWN? Or what is known is taste, colour, sensation, smell, sound, thought?

How can something that is NOT known be eaten and be eaten by what exactly? How can colour, sound, thought, smell, sound and sensation be eaten?

Sound, colour, thought, smell, taste and sensation are known. How can they not be known? Are you not aware of sound, colour, smell, sensation, taste and thought?

So does that mean awareness just knows? And simply doesn't require any
explanations or interpretations? Or are awareness and knowing the same thing?

Is a thought needed for it to be known when a sound appears or when a thought appears or when smell or sensation appears? Are they not simply known?

Awareness/knowing doesn't come through the senses. What exactly is it that is ‘sensing’? 'Sensory' experience is the knowing. That which is knowing of the know ie the knowingknown. There is no division between knowing and known. Just as there's no division between taste and sweet. 'Taste' and 'sweet' are not known separately through 'awareness'. 'Taste/sweet' IS experience ie knowing/THIS/awareness and it's not known through anything or by anyone – it’s simply THIS ie experience itself and experience itself is self aware.

I know I have been running around in circles, I hope you understand that I am going at this with every fiber of my being. But I spent a great deal of my life, living exclusively in the mind, that I am having a hard time seeing through its illusion. But I greatly appreciate the time and diligence. Thank you :)

I want you to slow down and just look at what I am pointing at. It will become clearer as we move through the exploration. You wanting to jump ahead is not going to get us anywhere fast.

Kay

[majiinx]

HOWEVER IS AN APPLE ACTUALLY KNOWN? Or what is known is taste, colour, sensation, smell, sound, thought?

Taste, colour, sensation, smell, sound, and thought of the apple are known, not the apple itself.

How can something that is NOT known be eaten and be eaten by what exactly? How can colour, sound, thought, smell, sound and sensation be eaten?

Eating just happens, there is nothing to know. All we know of is the senses and the apple interacting together. There is no separate experience of sound, color, thought, smell and sensation. It all simply goes together.

Is a thought needed for it to be known when a sound appears or when a thought appears or when smell or sensation appears? Are they not simply known?

Things are just known, our thought of it is not a knowing, just a short version that fails miserably to describe it.