Going in circles

[tomk]

I don't find anything at all behind this.

[jeffdilbeck]

So is there a 'you' at all, has there ever really been?

Sending love,
Jeff

[tomk]

No, just a body with physical attributes; a complex configuration of molecules. All the emotions, thoughts, moods, and sensations are automatic reactions derived from physical sources.

The illusion of a personal self is still there but when I look for it, it goes and I see there is nothing behind it. It’s kind of like a hollow facade.

[jeffdilbeck]

Let us turn the focus outward for a bit. Go out, look at people, look at things, notice how life happens without a real doer. As thoughts pop up, just let them be there, don't try to control, just keep looking. Look behind the thoughts and see that there is no one thinking them. When thoughts judge others, look at these thoughts, then look behind the thoughts, and see that there is no thinker, just movement of mind. If you start getting discouraged, just keep looking, there is no one to get discouraged, no one thinking. Everything just happens without a manager.

Report back your experience in detail please.

[tomk]

OK, I worked on this all day and I’m definitely getting a feel for what you’re saying. Anything that comes up just look behind it and find nothing there. As I was at work walking around, focused outward and looking around I couldn’t help noticing the vividness and the continuous flowing movement of the surroundings, clear and unobstructed by any mental interference. This became even more noticeable while driving home and seeing the people moving around outside. The more I settled into this the more I receded. Even eating lunch I realized that the taste of the food became more vivid when I wasn't there.

The doer did tend to come back out of habit, especially when talking to people. But even while having conversations I was able to see through this and realize that I am not involved even while talking and listening. That was strange. Now I can notice this with anything. Even as I type I see that I am not doing anything. It seems that when the self comes back I can just look straight through it. Then the sense objects immediately become clear and focused again in direct proportion to my absence.

[jeffdilbeck]

So....:)

The self which came back was a feeling, and not a reality?

Sending love,
Jeff

[tomk]

Right, just a habit of the mind, imagination. It is not constant so cannot be real. It is not there when the focus is outward or if the mind is not active so it must be a mental construction. If it were real it could not be seen through. It would be seen as something that could be pointed out. It is nothing but an imaginary center with no real substance. It is a logical but incorrect assumption that the mind makes and then uses to its advantage to make further connections from memory fragments, kind of like seeing constellations in the sky.

[jeffdilbeck]

And what experiences this?

Much love,
Jeff

[tomk]

Initially I wanted to say I don’t know, because there seemed to be no answer. But it appears that no experiencer is needed. Everything is happening spontaneously. The experiencer is an afterthought, out of sync with what is occurring. This is why when I am focused outward as reality is happening I am absent, or when I look for myself there is nothing to find. I can never exist in the actual moment. There is no place for me there. I can only exist in the mind as a concept, apart from reality.

[jeffdilbeck]

Excellent seeing.

So if there is no experiencer needed, is there an actual experiencer in reality?

[tomk]

I only find perception. Perception of sense objects. Perception of thoughts, sensations, etc. but no perceiver, no experiencer.

[jeffdilbeck]

I have a few final questions for you. Please answer in as much detail as possible.

1) Is there a 'me', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form? Was there ever? how about self, is there anything that is separate from everything else?

2) Explain in detail what the illusion of separate self is, when it starts and how it works.

3) How does it feel to see this? describe in detail.

4) How would you describe it to somebody who has never heard about this illusion but is curious about it.

5) What was the last bit that pushed you over, made you look? was there a specific moment when seeing happened or was it gradual? what exactly happened?

[tomk]

1) Is there a 'me', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form? Was there ever? How about self, is there anything that is separate from everything else?

There is no me, no self. There is no perceiver or experiencer. There is only perception alone. What is real now must always be real. Therefore, since there is no separate self now, there can never have been a separate self. There can be no self in reality. It is only an afterthought, a concept.

2) Explain in detail what the illusion of separate self is, when it starts and how it works.

The mind assumes a perceiver because it appears to make sense based on the knowledge it has acquired. It appears intuitive that for perception to occur there would be a perceiver. It uses this idea to create the illusion of a center which connects memory fragments to create further patterns to build a “life” out of. This new center calls itself ‘me’, and proceeds to claim ownership to its perceived actions, objects, thoughts, sensations, etc., creating what it calls “my life”. But it is all based on human logic which is prone to error.

As soon as the mind begins to learn it fills in gaps in knowledge by making assumptions, building on the knowledge it has acquired. The illusion of a separate self is a fundamental assumption that appears obvious and therefore goes unquestioned. This assumption is reinforced by family and society. The assumption appears perfectly logical and innocent at the time but eventually conflicts with reality, causing suffering. There are many examples of this same mental process in ancient mythology. People had relatively little knowledge about the world and their minds filled in the gaps with tales of gods and heroes. As more knowledge is gained the conclusions change. But even great minds like Newton and Einstein made assumptions about the physical world that were later proved wrong.

When the idea of a separate self is finally disputed, the mind resists. But with help and persistence it is seen that the evidence for a separate self isn’t there. It was just another myth.

3) How does it feel to see this? Describe in detail.

It is a relief to be cleared of doubt. Seeing clearly there is no self, there is no longer the need to question. The assumed self was the one who doubted and the questioned. It appears now that the knowledge was already there, but was clouded by doubt and resistance. This knowledge and clarity appears to be continuing to settle in. The illusion still arises but is transparent, easily seen for what it is.

4) How would you describe it to somebody who has never heard about this illusion but is curious about it?

I would describe it as the mind’s attempt to explain perception by assuming an entity who perceives. My mind struggled with this. The idea of a separate self makes too much sense to the mind. But the mind will always lead you away from the truth. Only direct perception without assumptions or concepts can see through this. I was not able to do this on my own. All that is real presents itself as real, without having to search for it. If you have to search for it, it was never there. Hence you will never find yourself no matter how hard you look.

5) What was the last bit that pushed you over made you look? Was there a specific moment when seeing happened or was it gradual? What exactly happened?

It was a gradual process of clearing away doubt. It helped when you kept telling me to look behind all thoughts, etc. It kept me from getting distracted with the nonsense the mind was throwing up. But the last bit was when you asked what experiences this. The mind struggled for an answer then went blank. The question was suddenly absurd, like being asked to divide by zero. There was no logical answer except to say that no experiencer exists, only perception.

Thank you,
Tom

[jeffdilbeck]

I posted your final answers for other guides to look at with me. Excellent looking my friend. :)

After you answer any needed final questions or clarifications you will be added to our aftercare group, where you can meet and share with others who have also seen what you've seen.

One of the confirmers asked for the answer to this brilliant question "Is there an experiencer experiencing, or is there only experience? Please look at this. Does experience belong to the body, or does the body belong to experience?"


Love,
Jeff

[tomk]

"Is there an experiencer experiencing, or is there only experience? Please look at this. Does experience belong to the body, or does the body belong to experience?"

It is a good question, and a good follow up to your earlier question “What experiences this?”

Nothing can claim ownership of experience. It stands alone. There is no room for an experiencer in a spontaneous present reality. Experience is all. Nor does the body belong to experience. It is part of it. There is no possession whatsoever.

Incidentally, it occurred to me earlier that ownership or possession may be instinctual. In all of nature, claiming ownership of food, territory, and mates helps keep the bodies and the species alive in competitive environments. That may be why it is hard to see through. But it is all conceptual. For there to be ownership there must be an owner, which is simply not the case.