SelfingStrong

[DrWilko]

Awesome looking Lisa. I can see that you are becoming much clearer about thought.

Loads to go into there, but first let's look at his a bit more:

Experience is happening regardless of what is being thought. It's pretty clear...have definitely had some very "light" feelings upon realizing this...like a moment of thoughts and body not really being connected at all. But it's fleeting. Would it be possible to do another exercise just so this crystalizes a little more?

There is a very sticky belief that can need looking at in various ways before the truth really sinks in. In any choice, in any want or need or desire, any so called willed action, there is a belief that thought somehow got there first.

Let's look at that belief.

Take a look at your hand. Hold the palm out, facing upwards. Now turn it over. Do that a few times.

What made it happen - did you choose to turn it over? Whatever your answer, do you actually know or remember at the time you turned it over what really made it happen?

Okay - next. Now "decide" to turn it over. Watch carefully now as you turn the hand over. At the moment the hand turns over, is thought controlling the hand, making it happen? Does the thought arise "I am making this happen"?

Try this a few times.

Okay, next:

Look at the hand. Decide not to turn it over. Now turn it over. Is this possible?

Is there any consistency in the way thought deals with the experience of the hand turning over? Does the thought "I am going to turn my hand over" always come before the hand turning over? Sometimes? Never? There is no one right answer here, just explore and come to your own conclusions!

One thing to consider here: if thought is not controlling action, yet there is still a "sense" that "I" did it, then this "I" must be something different to thought (and hearing, sight, taste, touch and smell)... How are we doing at finding it?

Let me know how you get on!

All good wishes,

Dave

[DrWilko]

When you've looked at the hand, have a look at this too:

Tell me about fear and sadness. What are they, in actual experience? What do they seem to be, as a story? And ask the same question - is the thought defining the sensation, making it this or that emotion? Or is there just sensation, and thought attempting to assign it a label, to define it? Does thought create what it attempts to describe? Is thought itself the experience? Or is there just experience exactly as it is, regardless of thoughts?

So, trying to be honest here, this is still a little sticky for some reason. It is definitely sensation and thought attempts to define or label it. I can see it clearly sometimes but at other times, I get tricked by the thoughts in that it feels like they create a me that needs to be fearful or sad. In other words, it does seem it is creating what it attempts to describe. It feels like thought itself is the experience.

Okay, now you seem clearer about thought, what it does and what it doesn't do. We have looked at experience of seeing hearing tasting touching smelling - thinking also is actual experience.

When we looked at seeing, you noticed that there was no separate seer and sight objects, but only seeing. When we looked at hearing, you noticed that there were no separate hearer and sound objects, only hearing, when we looked at tasting.... And so on.

So seeing is actual experience of seeing. There is appearance of colour but the actual experience is just seeing.

Hearing is actual experience of hearing. There is appearance of sound but the actual experience is just hearing.

Tasting is actual experience... Smelling is actual experience.... Sensing/touching is actual experience.... And so on.

So also notice that thinking is no different.

Thinking is actual experience of thinking. There is the appearance of thought, but the actual experience is just thinking.

Is there a separate thinker and thought? Or just thinking?

Is actual experience of thinking anything other than thinking?

Does thinking create seeing, hearing, feeling etc? Or is it just happening, like seeing is happening, like feeling is happening and so on?

So - in one sense - thinking does create what it attempts to describe - there are no things without thinking.

There is no table without thinking.

No sadness without thinking.

So "table" and "sadness" are actual experience - of thought. But they are not sensation or colour. The thoughts do not create sensing, or hearing or anything, which are doing fine by themselves.

So the only thing to notice is that when thinking creates table, or sadness, or "I", that this remains just thinking. Sadness exists, as content of thought. Table exists, as content of thought. But table does not exist and is not created in sensation by thought. Table is only actual experience in thought only. So with sadness, so with "I".

And thought just happens.

Is there a thinker choosing thoughts?

Or do thoughts just arise?

Whatever the answer - reread the above and let me know what comes up for you.

[EMWBerry]

Hi Dave...will reply 1st thing in the am. Thank you!

[EMWBerry]

Hi Dave,

Take a look at your hand. Hold the palm out, facing upwards. Now turn it over. Do that a few times.
What made it happen - did you choose to turn it over? Whatever your answer, do you actually know or remember at the time you turned it over what really made it happen?

I don't really know what's making it happen but it's not a thought. It just seems to happen on it's own.

Okay - next. Now "decide" to turn it over. Watch carefully now as you turn the hand over. At the moment the hand turns over, is thought controlling the hand, making it happen? Does the thought arise "I am making this happen"?

Thought is not controlling the hand to make it happen. I did this several times thought out the day and there was sometimes the thought "I am making this happen" but it had no impact on what was happening. So, just a thought popping up creating that sense that I am doing the hand turning but I can see it's just a thought.

Look at the hand. Decide not to turn it over. Now turn it over. Is this possible?

No, it's not possible. The word "decide" is misleading. I'm not sure how you actually decide to do something. (I think if I knew that, my life would be very different - ha!)

There is a very sticky belief that can need looking at in various ways before the truth really sinks in. In any choice, in any want or need or desire, any so called willed action, there is a belief that thought somehow got there first.

So I think I'm clear on thought, that they have no effect on what is happening especially when I do these exercises but this comment had me confused a bit. If we go back to the example of my daughter not taking her medicine, it did feel like the thought came, "she needs to take this medicine" and that created the will to have her do it. Are you saying the thought does not come first?

I'm going to reply to the other topics in a separate post. Thanks!

[EMWBerry]

Hello,
Again, it took a few reads to get what you were saying here but I think I've got it.

Is there a separate thinker and thought? Or just thinking?

There is just thinking.

Is actual experience of thinking anything other than thinking?

No.

Does thinking create seeing, hearing, feeling etc? Or is it just happening, like seeing is happening, like feeling is happening and so on?

It is just happening.

So - in one sense - thinking does create what it attempts to describe - there are no things without thinking.
There is no table without thinking. No sadness without thinking.So "table" and "sadness" are actual experience - of thought. But they are not sensation or colour. The thoughts do not create sensing, or hearing or anything, which are doing fine by themselves.
So the only thing to notice is that when thinking creates table, or sadness, or "I", that this remains just thinking. Sadness exists, as content of thought. Table exists, as content of thought. But table does not exist and is not created in sensation by thought. Table is only actual experience in thought only. So with sadness, so with "I"

.
Yes, how strange to see it like this.

And thought just happens.
Is there a thinker choosing thoughts?

No thinker choosing thought.

Or do thoughts just arise?

They seem to arise out of nothing then disappear.

Thank you Dave...

[DrWilko]

Brilliant looking, as always Lisa.

So, a few of things to clarify. Firstly, I don't think this was answered:

Is there any consistency in the way thought deals with the experience of the hand turning over? Does the thought "I am going to turn my hand over" always come before the hand turning over? Sometimes? Never? There is no one right answer here, just explore and come to your own conclusions!

What did you find?

And:

Are you saying the thought does not come first?

I was saying that there was a belief that it came first. What do you find? Let's look at:

Small example, my daughter is due for a dentist appt. I was sitting in the car at the gas station, the thought appeared that I needed to schedule the appt, then I made the call to the dentist. I have no idea where the thought came from. It just showed up. I wasn't trying to think it or anything like that. But after it was all, done, there was a sense that "I" did it.

Did this sense of self appear after the event? When you look at this sense, does it appear to be something outside of experience (tasting touching smelling sensing seeing hearing thinking), or simply a way of describing stuff happening? To put it another way, is "sense of self" something other than/separate to/different from experience: ie. all this stuff is either happening to this "sense", or this "sense" is making stuff happen? Or is "sense of self" simply the sum total of experience, labeled by thought as "sense that I did it"?

And also:

If we go back to the example of my daughter not taking her medicine, it did feel like the thought came, "she needs to take this medicine" and that created the will to have her do it.

What is "the will to have her do it" in actual experience?

We mentioned that thought "creates" what it attempts to describe, in the sense that there is no "table" without thought, no "will" without thought etc.

But to say "create" implies a creator. Is there something separate to thought, creating thought?

Is thought itself creating thought?

Or is there only thinking happening?

And lastly:

Look at the hand. Decide not to turn it over. Now turn it over. Is this possible?

No, it's not possible. The word "decide" is misleading. I'm not sure how you actually decide to do something. (I think if I knew that, my life would be very different - ha!)

Isn't this just the same as looking at chair and calling it table? Can I think one thing and do something different? Maybe have another go at that one!

Let me know what you find out.

All warm wishes,
Dave

[EMWBerry]

Hi Dave,
Oh,I somehow missed that one.

Is there any consistency in the way thought deals with the experience of the hand turning over? Does the thought "I am going to turn my hand over" always come before the hand turning over? Sometimes? Never? There is no one right answer here, just explore and come to your own conclusions!

I did not notice any consistency in the way thought deals with experience. That "I am going to turn my hand over" thought was only there sometimes. Most of the time, there was no thought at all about turning my hand over. It just happened. And there was really no connection between the thought and the action.

Did this sense of self appear after the event? When you look at this sense, does it appear to be something outside of experience (tasting touching smelling sensing seeing hearing thinking), or simply a way of describing stuff happening? To put it another way, is "sense of self" something other than/separate to/different from experience: ie. all this stuff is either happening to this "sense", or this "sense" is making stuff happen? Or is "sense of self" simply the sum total of experience, labeled by thought as "sense that I did it"

In this specific dentist appointment example, that sense of self was a way of describing stuff happening that appeared after the event. However, I can think of scenarios where it feels like stuff is "happening to" this sense of self, particularly when it's something I don't particularly want or like. Lots of situations with the kids, husband, family. Or another example...our heat broke recently when it was very cold here and it was going to take a day or so to fix...just a big inconvenience really...and at the time, it felt like that situation was happening to me. As I am typing this, it seems strange that I could have thought that something like that was "happening to" me.

What is "the will to have her do it" in actual experience?

In actual experience, it is just a thought. I do notice bodily sensation too.

But to say "create" implies a creator. Is there something separate to thought, creating thought?

I cannot find a creator of thought. I'm not sure if I'm not looking here but it seems they come from nothingness.

Is thought itself creating thought?

No.

Or is there only thinking happening?

Only thinking happening.

Isn't this just the same as looking at chair and calling it table? Can I think one thing and do something different? Maybe have another go at that one!

Yes, I can think one thing and do something different.

Lisa

[DrWilko]

Hi Lisa,

However, I can think of scenarios where it feels like stuff is "happening to" this sense of self, particularly when it's something I don't particularly want or like. Lots of situations with the kids, husband, family. Or another example...our heat broke recently when it was very cold here and it was going to take a day or so to fix...just a big inconvenience really...and at the time, it felt like that situation was happening to me. As I am typing this, it seems strange that I could have thought that something like that was "happening to" me.

It "feels like it it was happening to me". To this, again please look at this:

When you look at this "me" does it appear to be something outside of experience (tasting touching smelling sensing seeing hearing thinking), or simply a way of describing stuff happening? To put it another way, is "me" something other than/separate to/different from experience: ie. all this stuff is either happening to this "me", or this "me" is making stuff happen? Or is "me" simply the sum total of experience, labeled by thought as "me".

Can "me" be found that this is happening to? Is there anywhere we have not looked?

Best,
Dave

[EMWBerry]

Hi Dave,

When you look at this "me" does it appear to be something outside of experience (tasting touching smelling sensing seeing hearing thinking), or simply a way of describing stuff happening? To put it another way, is "me" something other than/separate to/different from experience: ie. all this stuff is either happening to this "me", or this "me" is making stuff happen? Or is "me" simply the sum total of experience, labeled by thought as "me".

No, I am not able to find this “me” outside of experience. I can see it’s a language thing or a way to describe what’s happening. And In recalling past events, I don’t believe there was a me” there. In the present moment though, I’m having some diffulty. There is a sense of separateness there but it has to be a thought because I can’t find “me” anywhere else.

Can "me" be found that this is happening to? Is there anywhere we have not looked?

No, “me” cannot be found and I don’t know where else to look. There is just the belief that the life is coming from this body and therefore it’s mine...and separate from everyone else.

I’m sorry, I thought I was close Dave but I hope I’m not lost again. Should I take some more time with this one?

[DrWilko]

Hi Lisa,

Brilliant. Great, honest looking.

I’m sorry, I thought I was close Dave but I hope I’m not lost again. Should I take some more time with this one?

Hey - nothing to be sorry about. You are doing fine.

There is just the belief that the life is coming from this body and therefore it’s mine...and separate from everyone else.

We can look at body, location and separation if necessary - but for now I would like us to pause our dialogue for a while while you consider this:

Sense of self is nothing other than experience itself. "Lisa", decision, will: they are illusions. If a thought occurs that appears to predict what will happen a few times, a belief begins to form. If a thought appears to describe what happened, using the labels or mental images of "I", Lisa, the story (and the belief), appear to continue.

But if you look back at what you have found, it is clear that "I", Lisa, will, decision are nothing more than thoughts arising, like any other thoughts arising. You have seen for yourself that nothing makes these thoughts arise. They just occur.

There is nothing stopping you from seeing this clearly other than the story (belief) that "I" exists, and that this "I" recieves or causes experience, simply repeating itself, in the face of the bare facts and evidence to contrary seen time and again in this very thread. There is nothing preventing you from seeing that this story is merely thoughts arising, other than another story about fear, which includes the idea that somehow, something will be lost. These are simply more thoughts too.

Your task over the next few days is to read back our thread, look at the exercises again if necessary, then come back to this statement and see what you find.

Just check in every day or two with how you are getting on with that and we can take it from there.

All good wishes,
Dave

[EMWBerry]

Ok, I’m looking forward to it. Will touch base in a couple of days. Thanks Dave.

[DrWilko]

Hey Lisa,

How has it been going?

[EMWBerry]

...just about to go to bed after a crazy day. Will respond more in the am. Thx!

[EMWBerry]

Hi Dave - Sorry for the delay. I have read through this thread and definitely have moments of clarity but it gets lost when I'm caught up doing things or not really focussed on reading through this. In the thread, you had mentioned taking note of the thought story of "wanting" and then to look at the experience. Other than thought of wanting, what is there? I have had some success with this and it's amazing because nothing is there but it just doesn't stick. The belief comes back (very insidious!) without me realizing it. And very quickly, too. Putting the kids to bed last night, there was a very strong "desire" to physically get them into bed...I could see it was a thought...nothing else there. But then I get distracted...and when it was all over, there were all of these thoughts that "I" got them to bed...like my thoughts and what I was saying had an impact on things. Does the looking need to be constant?

There is nothing stopping you from seeing this clearly other than the story (belief) that "I" exists, and that this "I" recieves or causes experience, simply repeating itself, in the face of the bare facts and evidence to contrary seen time and again in this very thread. There is nothing preventing you from seeing that this story is merely thoughts arising, other than another story about fear, which includes the idea that somehow, something will be lost. These are simply more thoughts too.

I think this is accurate. If it is fear that keeping the belief in place, I'm having a hard time getting to it now. I don't notice the fear it like I did before.

[DrWilko]

Hi Lisa,

Great to hear from you.

If it is fear that keeping the belief in place, I'm having a hard time getting to it now. I don't notice the fear it like I did before.

Ok - good to hear that. So how about this:

In the thread, you had mentioned taking note of the thought story of "wanting" and then to look at the experience. Other than thought of wanting, what is there? I have had some success with this and it's amazing because nothing is there but it just doesn't stick. The belief comes back (very insidious!) without me realizing it. And very quickly, too. Putting the kids to bed last night, there was a very strong "desire" to physically get them into bed...I could see it was a thought...nothing else there. But then I get distracted...and when it was all over, there were all of these thoughts that "I" got them to bed...like my thoughts and what I was saying had an impact on things.

Another thing we mentioned in the thread was expectations. Look at it this way: we are simply looking to see what is patently the case, what the evidence in experience shows. There is no autonomous, independent, separate self. There never has been an autonomous, independent, separate self. Realising that this is the case does not mean that what is being called "wanting", "decision" or "sense of self" is going to simply disappear in a puff of smoke - these are not self now, they never have been self. Whether the stories continue or not is not the point. Please remember that nothing is lost or disappears in this process, it is simply that we see the stories for what they are.

Does the looking need to be constant?

The more you look, the more the realisation becomes the new "default" way of seeing things (like anything, it takes practice, this is what we are doing here). So look as much as you can, especially during those moments of needing something to happen or be different. Is anything missing from experience in the present moment? Is anything making experience happen? Is there anything outside, separate, to tasting touching smelling hearing feeling thinking that experience is happening to?

But no - once it is known that this has been seen - that there is no autonomous, independent, separate self - "looking" does not need to be constant.

So: I looked back at the thread too and before we continue,I don't think you answered this:

Are you saying the thought does not come first?

I was saying that there was a belief that it came first. What do you find?

We looked at the hand exercise, and a couple of examples of "decisions" or "wants" from your own experience. Look back at the thread to see what you found out. Please share.

All good wishes,
Dave