I want to realise the absence of a sepeterate self

[Vilhelm]

Hi Michael

Find out please. Are thoughts yours or do they just occur?
Is there an owner of thought?

There is simply the arising of thought, some image or language. When in direct experience they simply dissolve. There is just experience being known, and thoughts dissolving as they are arising. They are ownerless, and they are recognized to be ownerless while knowing experience. The story doesn't unfold into the next thought, it ends as this arisings of thought dissolves. No side to the story is taken, nothing is added to the discussion.

Kind regards,
Vilhelm

[MichaelD]

Hi Vilhelm,

Your answers to the 'thought' questions are bang on.

However:

Find me anything that has a looser or tighter grip on experience!!!!!
Or is there just experience occurring?

Nothing tightens the grip or loosens the grip on experience. It's just that experience "of holding energy" and then "releasing that energy" happens. There is still just experience occuring.

Is there anything having any kind of 'grip' on experience.

Is anything else happenning other than experience occurring?

Is it being made to happen by someone?

Is it happenning to someone?

Michael

[Vilhelm]

Hello Michael,

Is there anything having any kind of 'grip' on experience.

Experience is all inclusive, there is no here and there. Just this. Experience is just whatever is occuring, including whatever would have a socalled "grip" on experience.

Is anything else happenning other than experience occurring?

No. Not that this truth is liberating at the moment :P

Is it being made to happen by someone?
Is it happenning to someone?

Yes, thoughts make it seem like experience is happening by someone. Making it seem like there is an engaged agent appropriating experience - thinking thoughts and authoring actions.
No, there are just thoughts about experience giving an impression of it being so.

Vilhelm

[MichaelD]

Hi,

Is it being made to happen by someone?
Is it happenning to someone?

Yes, thoughts make it seem like experience is happening by someone. Making it seem like there is an engaged agent appropriating experience - thinking thoughts and authoring actions.
No, there are just thoughts about experience giving an impression of it being so.

thoughts make it seem like experience is happening by someone. Making it seem like there is an engaged agent appropriating experience - thinking thoughts and authoring actions.

It may seem like that is happenning; but is it?

Or, as you have noticed, is it just thoughts claiming the experience?

Michael

[Vilhelm]

Hello Michael,

It may seem like that is happenning; but is it?

Or, as you have noticed, is it just thoughts claiming the experience?

Looking closer at this.

Vilhelm

[Vilhelm]

Hello Michael,

It may seem like that is happenning; but is it?

Or, as you have noticed, is it just thoughts claiming the experience?

It is simply implied to be happening. It's just a habbit of view.
Yes, self is simply implied to be real by thoughts about experience.

Vilhelm

[Vilhelm]

Hello Michael,

Not really getting clearer about experience. Just in the mode of looking at the moment.
Just looking closer at experience, and asking questions like "what is it," and "where is it?" :)

But is there anyone doing the "looking closer at experience?" Isn't experience just of looking closer?
Are thoughts claiming this looking?

Just looking.

Vilhelm

[MichaelD]

Hi Vilhelm,

See if you can notice the way thoughts claim an action and attribute it to the 'self'.

So for example if sensations of discomfort are building in the lower abdomen see if you can notice that you begin to move to go to the loo when the thought comes in; "I'm going to have a pee now".

Likewise with hunger sensations. You will have begun to move to the kitchen /fridge just before the thought comes in; "I'm going to make some food now" .

There is the occurance of a behaviour beginning and then the claiming "I" thought that continues to weave the narrative of self.

Subtle level of attention required!!....

Michael

[Vilhelm]

Hello Michael,

See if you can notice the way thoughts claim an action and attribute it to the 'self'.
So for example if sensations of discomfort are building in the lower abdomen see if you can notice that you begin to move to go to the loo when the thought comes in; "I'm going to have a pee now".

The question arose "where is the experience of a thought happening," then there was the experience of looking inwards to see where it was visible. This behaviour of looking inward was claimed by thought, so that "I" was looking inward to see a thought. The action was seen as simply happening, and thought about it seen to be false. The action is seen to be claimed by an imaginary self through thought about experience. Experience is noticed to be happening, and the claiming it to be happening by someone is also seen.

Likewise with hunger sensations. You will have begun to move to the kitchen /fridge just before the thought comes in; "I'm going to make some food now" .
There is the occurance of a behaviour beginning and then the claiming "I" thought that continues to weave the narrative of self.

There is the thoughts labelling an action as happening by me, and even retrospectively assesing that it was happening by me. "Remember, I was there doing it one minute ago," *referring to some past action, which might not even have been claimed at that point.

Experience is getting clearer. This is helping :)
One paraphrase of which liking is happening :P
It's the difference between sitting in the cinema and being totally captured by the story, or hearing the projector, seeing the people in front of you, reading the subtitles, and watching a play of light on the wall.

Thankful,
Vilhelm

[MichaelD]

Hi Wilhelm,

This behaviour of looking inward was claimed by thought, so that "I" was looking inward to see a thought. The action was seen as simply happening, and thought about it seen to be false. The action is seen to be claimed by an imaginary self through thought about experience. Experience is noticed to be happening, and the claiming it to be happening by someone is also seen.

This is the crux of it. What you have just called the imaginary self is just another thought about the previous action (or thought).

So there is an ongoing narrative constructed by thoughts with "I" , me, or mine in them. You have noticed that thought content is insubstantial / false / unreal.

Why then does an "I" though point to anything real?


Also,

You could also ask yourself if there is an "I" present.

I suspect you will not get the answer 'yes' but that you will get 'no' or more likely there will just be silence.

If you do get 'yes' ask it to show itself. Insist. ?Really insist. Demand an end to this.

It won't be able to (since it isn't there).

:) Michael

[Vilhelm]

Hi Michael,

So there is an ongoing narrative constructed by thoughts with "I" , me, or mine in them. You have noticed that thought content is insubstantial / false / unreal.

Why then does an "I" though point to anything real?

It doesn't point to anything real. It points to an imaginary subject doing actions, feeling feelings, or seeing what's already seen. Or to an imaginary object, portraying it to be somewhere in the body or behind experience.
All of which are simply happening. And is just seen to not be me.

You could also ask yourself if there is an "I" present.

I suspect you will not get the answer 'yes' but that you will get 'no' or more likely there will just be silence.

If you do get 'yes' ask it to show itself. Insist. ?Really insist. Demand an end to this.

It won't be able to (since it isn't there).

This made sense to do at the time, but every subsequent time I did this there was the seeming claiming it to be done by "me."

I like this way of looking: "Yes, there are thoughts about you, and images about what you are, but is it you?" "There is the seeming subject of experience, but is it really pointing to you?"
This method gives freedom :D

But the self hasn't dissolved, this is just a more natural approach than feeling oneself to be the doer of some looking for self.

Many thanks,
Vilhelm

[MichaelD]

Hi Vilhelm,

So there is an ongoing narrative constructed by thoughts with "I" , me, or mine in them. You have noticed that thought content is insubstantial / false / unreal.

Why then does an "I" though point to anything real?
It doesn't point to anything real. It points to an imaginary subject doing actions, feeling feelings, or seeing what's already seen. Or to an imaginary object, portraying it to be somewhere in the body or behind experience.
All of which are simply happening. And is just seen to not be me.

Brilliant. Exactly.

But the self hasn't dissolved

But you have seen that it doesn't exist, that it is just a thought story.

So how can it dissolve?

Remember there will always be a sense of aliveness or beingness (for want of a better word). There will also be "I" thoughts chundering along but as you stated above they point to or signify nothing more than an imaginary character.

Warm wishes,

Michael

[Vilhelm]

Hi Michael,

But the self hasn't dissolved

But you have seen that it doesn't exist, that it is just a thought story.

So how can it dissolve?

Remember there will always be a sense of aliveness or beingness (for want of a better word). There will also be "I" thoughts chundering along but as you stated above they point to or signify nothing more than an imaginary character.

There is no self, and there never is, but the felt center of self hasn't dissolved. Which by the same logic isn't self either, just a concept, or point of reference :P

To me, one thing is seeing no self, and another is becoming more clear about experience.
When I was watching selfless experience the first times the whole of experience was seen as seperate from what was seeing it, which was simply seeing what experience was. This was a glympse of what the nature of experience is. That experience is simply dreaming, and the seeing it as dreaming is seen. These moments were very euphoric, and I recall them having impact on the following weeks. Lasting effect. (No, there is no me who recalls, or me that sees, it's just language :D)
Does the seeing of this secondary conciousness ever become a steady state?

Thankful,
Vilhelm

[MichaelD]

Hi,

There is no self, and there never is, but the felt center of self hasn't dissolved.

Please tell me more about this felt centre of self (which you have seen doesn't exist).

What is felt?

Where is it felt?

To me, one thing is seeing no self, and another is becoming more clear about experience.

OK, I think I understand. It can be difficult to itegrate or understand a new perspective.

To me, one thing is seeing no self, and another is becoming more clear about experience.
When I was watching selfless experience the first times the whole of experience was seen as seperate from what was seeing it, which was simply seeing what experience was. This was a glympse of what the nature of experience is. That experience is simply dreaming, and the seeing it as dreaming is seen. These moments were very euphoric, and I recall them having impact on the following weeks. Lasting effect. (No, there is no me who recalls, or me that sees, it's just language :D)

Sorry but I cannot quite understand this perhaps if you could fing another way of explaining your experience.

Does the seeing of this secondary conciousness ever become a steady state?

A full, continuous experience of non duality would equate with enlightenment.

If it helps you I can try and explain my expeience:

There is a sense of freedom, the realisation that 'my' fundamental relationship with whatever we are in has shifted. There is a background silence / stillness. Sufferreing has hugely reduced and anxiety which blighted my life ended at the gate. Experience consists of sensation and a stream of thought. I can still over identify with thought and stories can begin to run (I call this selfing) but when noticed they drop away. I am much happier and enjoy life more.

I hope that helps you but remember we are all different so folk experience the results of seeing no-self in differrent ways.

Warmly,

Michael

[Vilhelm]

Hi Michael,

There is no self, and there never is, but the felt center of self hasn't dissolved.
Please tell me more about this felt centre of self (which you have seen doesn't exist).

What is felt?

Where is it felt?

It is the feeling of attention being payed from a place in the head, that it is directed towards things out there. This tension is felt in the head, and labelled hiding place of the self.

From your previous answers: There is attention being payed, but is it a you paying attention?
The feeling (unlabelled at the moment) is felt, and attention being payed without a me doing it is noticed, and things out there are known to be labelled raw data of seeing happening.

To me, one thing is seeing no self, and another is becoming more clear about experience.
When I was watching selfless experience the first times the whole of experience was seen as seperate from what was seeing it, which was simply seeing what experience was. This was a glympse of what the nature of experience is. That experience is simply dreaming, and the seeing it as dreaming is seen. These moments were very euphoric, and I recall them having impact on the following weeks. Lasting effect. (No, there is no me who recalls, or me that sees, it's just language :D)

Sorry but I cannot quite understand this perhaps if you could fing another way of explaining your experience.

The experience which occured about four times gave me a visual representation of experience as dreamed happenings, totally indifferent to what was seeing it. Which now can only be explained in the form of concepts, and can only be recollected in the form of concepts. I found that in the next moment after the glymse had occured I recalled the analogy of "The mirror not being affected by what it reflects" to be a perfect image into that insight. The analogy is perfect, but it has left out the experiential part of it. It points to conciousness, but not what is knowing it.
Jackson Peterson said in one of his videos that experience and the knowing of it are the same, but I don't believe that.
Maybe that explains it haha :D It captures selflesness, but as a more formative experience. Is this what is referred to as nondual awareness?

If it helps you I can try and explain my expeience:

There is a sense of freedom, the realisation that 'my' fundamental relationship with whatever we are in has shifted. There is a background silence / stillness. Sufferreing has hugely reduced and anxiety which blighted my life ended at the gate. Experience consists of sensation and a stream of thought. I can still over identify with thought and stories can begin to run (I call this selfing) but when noticed they drop away. I am much happier and enjoy life more.

I greatly appreciate that you explain this :p I like that you call it "over identify" because you recognize that you're never truly identified, it's just a continuing story of concepts. When you get identified is it like completing a puzzle, or is it simply a looking at the totallity of experience and immediate recognition happens?

Experience becoming more clear again,
Vilhelm