‘No doer of the deed is found...’

[Seamist]

That's really clear, Sara, well done
Similarly...
1. Close the eyes and hold up one hand. Pay attention only to the felt sensations ‘of the hand’.
2. Open the eyes, and now observe the hand by looking only.
3. While looking at the hand, pay attention to the felt sensations.

Repeat 1 to 3 as many times as needed and investigate…

Normally we believe that the sensation is coming from the sight, the ‘object’ seen (hand).
But if you look, is there any link between the sensation and the sight? In other words, is the sensation ‘coming from’ the sight (labelled as hand) or only thoughts and mental constructs link them?
Can you see that both the ‘visual sight’ and the sensation appear simultaneously but ‘separately’, meaning that none of them is coming from the other or contained by the other?

So they just appear equally, ‘beside’ each other without any hierarchy or link between them?

You can repeat the exercise with all of body parts. For the head you can use a mirror.

[River1]

Sensation is not coming from sight (I can feel sensations with eyes closed)
Sight is not coming from sensation (I can see the object without strong sensations)
So, neither is coming from, or contained within, the other.
When I look at my hand, and feel into the sensations, I cannot find a link between them other than in thought - there is no evidence that they are connected in direct experience.

[Seamist]

When I look at my hand, and feel into the sensations, I cannot find a link between them other than in thought - there is no evidence that they are connected in direct experience.

good

This next one has 2 parts to it. Here's the first:
The usual belief that 'I am this body' is usually tied in with the belief that the body as a separate item is responsible or 'DOING' the senses - 'I see', 'I hear', 'I feel' etc

We will begin with 'seeing' - Just that one sense on its own.

Close your eyes.
With eyes closed, you will now experience 'blackness'. There may be other things you can find going on, sure. If you are looking at a bright light, there may be a red glow. There may be sparkly bits or cloudy flecks appearing and disappearing - It really doesn't matter about the specifics.

Just to make things simple, whatever you can see with eyes closed, I'm going to refer to it as 'black' or 'blackness' just for simplicity.

1) With eyes closed, can you confirm that what is experienced is 'blackness' as I mentioned?
2) Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than 'blackness'?
3) Can what is witnessing the blackness be found?
4) Can a pair of eyes, an 'I' / 'me', a person be found that is witnessing the blackness? Or is there just 'blackness' to be found?
What do you find?
Can an INHERENT SEE-ER be found? Would anything that is suggested as the see-er, be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

x

[River1]

What I see when I close my eyes is 'blackness', as you describe.
I cannot find anything separate, a witness, a see-er or a self, who is 'doing' or 'receiving'. Seeing is not separate from, or contained within anything else. Without effort, 'blackness' is seen - I am not choosing it, my body is not 'doing' it, it is simply happening.

I'm aware that we're covering the same, or very similar, exercises that we explored near the beginning and I just wanted to check if this was intentional? I find it sometimes helpful, tuning into subtler layers, although I notice that at other times, having done them before, it is more difficult to meet it freshly.

Sara x

[Seamist]

Hi
Yes, we're looping round some exercises you did at the beginning now. You may have different response this time, or you may not - either is fine.Just engage with them as best you can.

Here's the second part of the exercise:
Let's move on to opening the eyes now.
Again, address this very simply - The 'seeing' sense only for the moment.

With eyes open, a world of objects appears . . . a room . . . a computer screen etc
What you can specifically see isn't of interest here, and whatever it is, I am simply going to refer to it as 'what can be seen'.
This might be a little more tricky, but give it some consideration.

1) With eyes open, can you confirm that what is experienced is 'what can be seen' as I mentioned?
2) Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than 'what can be seen'?
3) Can what is witnessing 'what can be seen' be found?
4) Can a pair of eyes, an 'I' / 'me', a “Sara” be found that is witnessing 'what can be seen'? Or is there just simply 'what can be seen' to be found?
What do you find?
Can an INHERENT SEE-ER be found? Would anything that is suggested as the see-er, be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

xx

[River1]

With eyes open I experience 'what can be seen' as you describe.
I cannot find an 'I', a see-er - only what can be seen can be found. Nothing, no one, doing the seeing, nothing separate from the experience.

Doing this exercise I realise:
Seeing does not happen 'in' awareness.
Awareness does not contain experience (in this case seeing). Awareness is experience. I cannot find anything other than, separate from experience. Experience does not take place 'within' anything.

[Seamist]

Great! And...
Look at whatever is in front of you. It is seen from the perspective of two windows (eyes) or is it like a windscreen view? Now zoom back in and try to find the thing that’s seeing. Is there seeing separate from what’s seen, or is there just what’s seen?
Is there any awareness separate from experience or is there just experience?

xx

[River1]

It is like a windscreen.
I can't find a thing that is setting. There is no see-er separate from what is seen.
There is no awareness separate from experience.

[River1]

*seeing

[Seamist]

Great
Find somewhere quiet to sit. Rest for a moment and listen to the sounds in the room where you are, or sounds from outside. Whatever it is, I'll just refer to it as 'what can be heard'.

1) In 'hearing' can anything be found other than 'what can be heard'?
2) Can what is doing the hearing be found? Or is there only 'what can be heard'?
3) An 'I'? a 'body'? a 'person'? a brain? a pair of ears? Can these be found doing the hearing? Or is there just 'what can be heard'?
What do you find?
Can an INHERENT HEARER be found? Would anything that is suggested as the hearer, be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

xx

[River1]

In hearing nothing but what is heard - no ‘body’ that is doing the hearing, no ‘I’ who is choosing what to hear, no person controlling awareness of sound. There is purely ‘what is heard’.
In the moments I see this, there is a beautiful sense of effortlessness and ease. However, these moments still seem fleeting.

[Seamist]

In the moments I see this, there is a beautiful sense of effortlessness and ease.

that's wonderful, Sara
Please close your eyes for this exercise, just notice any ‘mental’ images or thoughts that appear and put them aside.

Place a hand on a desk or table (flat surface) - Close your eyes.
Now 'go to' the feeling/sensation which we would normally refer to as 'hand on desk' and answer from what you can FIND.

1) How many things do you find? Are there two things (hand and desk) or is there one thing – sensation?
2) Can a ‘feeler’ be found in 'what is being felt'?
3) Do you notice 'one thing feeling another thing'? Or is there just 'a sensation'?
4) Do you find an 'I', a body, a hand 'feeling' . . . or is there just 'a sensation'?
What do you find?
Can an INHERENT FEELER be found? Would anything that is suggested as the feeler, be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

xx

[River1]

Only one thing can be found, there are not two distinct 'things' coming into contact, only sensation. There is nothing to tell me, in direct experience, that 'hand' is on 'table'. Only thought makes this interpretation of the experience.
No inherent 'feeler' can be found.

[Seamist]

Yep, quite right...
Please close your eyes for this exercise, just notice any ‘mental’ images or thoughts that appear and put them aside.

Place a hand on a desk or table (flat surface) - Close your eyes.
Now 'go to' the feeling/sensation which we would normally refer to as 'hand on desk' and answer from what you can FIND.

1) How many things do you find? Are there two things (hand and desk) or is there one thing – sensation?
2) Can a ‘feeler’ be found in 'what is being felt'?
3) Do you notice 'one thing feeling another thing'? Or is there just 'a sensation'?
4) Do you find an 'I', a body, a hand 'feeling' . . . or is there just 'a sensation'?
What do you find?
Can an INHERENT FEELER be found? Would anything that is suggested as the feeler, be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

xx

[River1]

Hi Prabhakari,
This is the same as the last one.
Sara x