Awakening

[Skygazer74]

The sensations is that energy, in the torso and head but again that's not evidence of Geoff. Thought makes that geoff.
When I say ""I" silently there is almost an immediate feeling of a doer in the head, torso and arms.(sensation plus thought again) It is strong but It's like a mirage. Sorry- i'm rambling about here. I can feel a bit of fluttering again, Like a glimpse that there might not be Geoff and then an immediate resistance or reassertion. I keep going back to no Geoff and there is a second or two there of a pause and quite and then it kind of snaps back.

That is ok, flashes of seeing will join up with repeated practice.

I actually think I should be doing a few of these exercises daily. It's like an antibiotic for doubt.

This sounds like a plan - as I say doubt is merely thought, and it is helpful every time thought arises like doubt or intellectualising or lawyering, to simply know it as thought and return to DE and the looking which will bring clarity.


So lets get clear about where we are at ok?
Do you feel clear that the body is not self?
Do you feel clear that there is no seer of seeing?
Hearer of hearing?
Feeler of feeling?
Is there any witness at all?

If I say to you - there is no self anywhere whatsoever to be found, what comes up?

It seems there is some pendulating happening with the sense of doer, or chooser, so here is another exercise for seeing through the agency:

Although you see that there is no noticer/observer/witness, there may still be the feeling of identification of being the ‘doer’. That it still ‘feels’ like there is a self that is the ‘chooser’. So let’s have a look at this as it has to do with the sense of seeing.

Take a few relaxed breaths to let the dust settle for a while, and then:
Look on your right.
Then look on your left.
Finally, bring your head back to centre, close your eyes and look in front.

Okay, so when you look on the right, the view on the right is seen (whatever that is).
When you look on the left, the view on the left is seen (whatever that is).
And then, when you look in front of you with eyes closed, the view in front is seen (ie ‘black space’).

So, when the view on the right is seen, do you have the ‘choice’ not to see? I’m not asking can you ‘choose’ to see something else like another view or ‘black space’ if you close your eyes. The question is; can you turn seeing off? Can you NOT see what is seen?

Same thing with the view on the left, can you NOT see the view on the left?
Same thing with the view in front with closed eyes, can you NOT see the ‘black space’?
Can you turn off seeing?
What did the 'chooser' choose? Did a 'self' choose something?
If you are unable to choose what you're aware of, then what else is there to choose?

[Skygazer74]

Sorry, another question for clarity - are you also clear that there is no thinker of thoughts?

Also, in terms of trying out a statement:

There is no self, as a separate being, and never was. No manager in charge, no owner, no witness, no organiser of experience. No one there, as in zero. There is life flowing freely as all forms, sensations, colours, sounds, feelings, thoughts, as one movement.

What happens, when you let this thought in?

[Geoff]

Hi Nic,
Sick today andNot doign any work but i can't stop going with this. I got some flashes and of peace and seeing it was like the drape from the window was cleared for a moment. I have a feeling I will look back at this time as very precious and I carry gratitude to you for walking me through this process.

This sounds like a plan - as I say doubt is merely thought, and it is helpful every time thought arises like doubt or intellectualising or lawyering, to simply know it as thought and return to DE and the looking which will bring clarity.

When the doubting psuedo-intellectual lawyer mind comes up my first inclination is to take it on and try to win the case. But then I know there will just be another question, and then another.. no real answers there and not what i'm looking for.

So lets get clear about where we are at ok?
Do you feel clear that the body is not self?
Do you feel clear that there is no seer of seeing?
Hearer of hearing?
Feeler of feeling?
Is there any witness at all?

Interesting, i just noticed that the first place I looked to answer about the body question was the mind. Then I dropped it and went to DE. I think this first looking to the mind might be an issue. In any case- in DE NOT the body, the body is sensations. Even to the mind it's just a vehicle.

In DE there is only seeing, only hearing. There does seem to be something open, awareness maybe, that is aware of seeing and hearing, feeling. It's not doing the seeing or hearing per se, and it's not separate. You could say it knows seeing as seeing and feeling as feeling. They are not the same. Is that which knows a witness? It's not a separate entity certainly. I seems both that which the feeling appears in and that which knows the feeling. That which the thought appears in and that which knows the thought.


If I say to you - there is no self anywhere whatsoever to be found, what comes up?

What comes up is that there is a story of a self, but not a self. There is a bit of quiet. Then I checked to see if there was still fear of rejection and found the fear and it's curious. How is this possible if there is no rejector or rejected?

Sorry, another question for clarity - are you also clear that there is no thinker of thoughts?

No thinker of thoughts definitely. Again there is that which is aware there is thought.

There is no self, as a separate being, and never was. No manager in charge, no owner, no witness, no organiser of experience. No one there, as in zero. There is life flowing freely as all forms, sensations, colours, sounds, feelings, thoughts, as one movement.

What happens, when you let this thought in?

[/quote]

I tried this twice.
The first time there was silence, peace, openess for about 20 seconds. Beautful. Wow. the mind was quiet and there was this warm feeling.

The second time- My family was in the room and it was hard to connect to. Hard to see that my wife and children were not anyone. Like the mind was pushing back. If i step back I can see that as thought. It does feel like i'm closer but missing something.

Thanks,
Geoff (was harder to write "my name" this time!)

[Skygazer74]

When the doubting psuedo-intellectual lawyer mind comes up my first inclination is to take it on and try to win the case. But then I know there will just be another question, and then another.. no real answers there and not what i'm looking for.

Yes exactly, this part of the mind is insatiable, and as you say, the answers do not lie in the questions, the answers lie in looking into DE! Try taking the mind and its doubting and questioning lightly, its just thoughts after all :)

In DE there is only seeing, only hearing. There does seem to be something open, awareness maybe, that is aware of seeing and hearing, feeling. It's not doing the seeing or hearing per se, and it's not separate. You could say it knows seeing as seeing and feeling as feeling. They are not the same. Is that which knows a witness? It's not a separate entity certainly. I seems both that which the feeling appears in and that which knows the feeling. That which the thought appears in and that which knows the thought.

Perfect. So yes there is witnessing, just as there is seeing and thinking, but in the witnessing can a witness be found?

What comes up is that there is a story of a self, but not a self. There is a bit of quiet. Then I checked to see if there was still fear of rejection and found the fear and it's curious. How is this possible if there is no rejector or rejected?

And can you see that the story of a self is only located in thoughts? In DE, where is this story? In DE, can you find rejection or fear of it?

There is no self, as a separate being, and never was. No manager in charge, no owner, no witness, no organiser of experience. No one there, as in zero. There is life flowing freely as all forms, sensations, colours, sounds, feelings, thoughts, as one movement.

What happens, when you let this thought in?

I tried this twice.
The first time there was silence, peace, openess for about 20 seconds. Beautful. Wow. the mind was quiet and there was this warm feeling.

The second time- My family was in the room and it was hard to connect to. Hard to see that my wife and children were not anyone. Like the mind was pushing back. If i step back I can see that as thought. It does feel like i'm closer but missing something. [/quote]

Beautiful, so there it is, the opening - so that suggestion ('There is no self...etc) could be useful to come back to a few times a day. That opening, that peace, that beauty, is all this is pointing to. That sounds like the freedom right there, so keep opening into it!

For now, really don't worry about other people, because it could be confusing. We can only look in DE for our own self! It is all life living itself, awareness arising, and the love will not disappear - perhaps it will be even more selfless.

So what is it that you think you might be missing? Is this just another doubt? Can you find anything missing in DE?

[Geoff]

HI Nic,

Perfect. So yes there is witnessing, just as there is seeing and thinking, but in the witnessing can a witness be found?

Witness can't be found but witnessing can. So witnessing/looking is like sensing in some way?

And can you see that the story of a self is only located in thoughts? In DE, where is this story? In DE, can you find rejection or fear of it?

Yes- this is starting to get more clear. The story of the self is only in thought. Not in DE. IN De there is no fear yet there is the sensation of contraction or tightening. Is that not the sensation of fear?

So what is it that you think you might be missing? Is this just another doubt? Can you find anything missing in DE?

Great question. Hmmm.. only thin thing that really jumps out is that I'm not quite clear on feelings arising not being felt by anything. Seeing occurs without a seer, but feelings/emotions are noticed but there is no noticer? Not yet clear.

by the way- I being under the weather i was able to spend some time looking around the forum and found this great exercise on imagining what a room looked like, what a fruit tasted like, and then visiting the room, tasting the fruit. It really showed how 2 dimensional and washed out thought imagination is compared to DE. The contrast was sharp! It kind of highlighted that maybe the intellect doubt lawyer doesnt have much worth defending. Relying on thought for what to trust loosing it's alure.

Thanks
Geoff

[Skygazer74]

Perfect. So yes there is witnessing, just as there is seeing and thinking, but in the witnessing can a witness be found?
Witness can't be found but witnessing can. So witnessing/looking is like sensing in some way?

Yes so it is all the same, everything is happening - the seeing, the hearing, the thinking, and the witnessing - but a seer, hearer, thinker or witness just isn't there. It is all happening just the same without the self we thought was there.

Yes- this is starting to get more clear. The story of the self is only in thought. Not in DE. IN De there is no fear yet there is the sensation of contraction or tightening. Is that not the sensation of fear?

The key point is that the story of self only exists as a thought. For your own interest thought: In the sensation what do you find? How is it known to be fear?
Does this contraction happen in response to the seeing that is happening?

So what is it that you think you might be missing? Is this just another doubt? Can you find anything missing in DE?
Great question. Hmmm.. only thin thing that really jumps out is that I'm not quite clear on feelings arising not being felt by anything. Seeing occurs without a seer, but feelings/emotions are noticed but there is no noticer? Not yet clear.

This is similar to the witness - feeling and emotions are arising, and noticing happens, but if you look can you find the noticer? It is like the thinker, thoughts arise but when we look there is only the space of awareness that can be found. There is this awareness, noticing, feeling, able to look at thoughts, at feelings, at sensations and perceptions, and it is all clear and totally free from a self! When it is clear, it is beautiful because all of those things (thoughts, feelings, perceptions etc) are free to be as they are, free to arise and pass without a story and a self, and what the self wants or who that self should be, being weaved from them.

So, again: There is no self, as a separate being, and never was. No manager in charge, no owner, no witness, no organiser of experience. No one there, as in zero. There is life flowing freely as all forms, sensations, colours, sounds, feelings, thoughts, as one movement.

How is that sitting with 'you' now? Any change? Any holding?

Are you able to answer the question - what is the self?


Its good that those exercises helped. If you are looking at other journeys just be wary of 'learning' the result of this enquiry - it can seem to be understood with the intellect, but only seen by looking. This one is similar:

Many experience the ‘me’ as being centred in the head.

What I would like you to do is imagine a small apple centred in the head.
Before the apple disappears….

…imagine a canary centred in the head, tweeting away.
Before, the canary flies off (weird huh?)….


…imagine a 'me' centred in the head.
Stay with it…

…imagine it is completely transparent. See straight through it…

…imagine there not seeming to be a 'me' in the head anymore.

Give it a go, see what happens.

You could also try again, and this time see if you can find the chooser or the 'imaginer' - is there a sense of it all just happening or is there still a sense of a self who is doing it?

Are you well enough to go out for a walk? I have a lovely exercise for when you do :)

Hope you feel better soon,

Nic

[Geoff]

Hi Nic,

The contraction is related to the previously supressedchildhood trauma and fear of rejection story. It’s a story but it’s in there and often I can’t see the thoughts only the contraction.

I’ll do the exercise and can definitely go for a walk.

I love don’t the exercises and the discovery they bring.

Will report back shortly
Chaim

[Geoff]

HI Nic,

So, again: There is no self, as a separate being, and never was. No manager in charge, no owner, no witness, no organiser of experience. No one there, as in zero. There is life flowing freely as all forms, sensations, colours, sounds, feelings, thoughts, as one movement.

How is that sitting with 'you' now? Any change? Any holding?

Are you able to answer the question - what is the self?

It's so interesting, at work, and with family and friends I slip back into the old paradigm. When I actively do DE, i start to see the truth. I'm not yet seeing it cross over into my life. When I read the sentence above I get a hit for a moment. A quieting and opening into the flow. Then it kind of reverts back. I wish I could say more.

…imagine it is completely transparent. See straight through it…

…imagine there not seeming to be a 'me' in the head anymore.

Give it a go, see what happens.

You could also try again, and this time see if you can find the chooser or the 'imaginer' - is there a sense of it all just happening or is there still a sense of a self who is doing it?

Apologies here Nic=Did you mean that the head is completely transparent or that the "me" is transparent?
Not sure I'm getting this one. Tried it a few times. When I imagined the "me" it was like this little ball of consciousness that chooses and imagines, tries to control right up in the head. Then I saw just a brain and it got a little quieter.

You asked "what is the self?" The self seems like a projection created by thoughts with "I" as the subject. By "I" we mean that which chooses and controls, the doer, The person. I'm confused though, because as i write this the answer seems to live in my intellect as apposed to being seen. Not sure what I'm missing here Nic. What you wrote about thoughts feelings, perceptions being allowed to be as they are, to arise and pass without a story of a self is something I somehow know is True and feel so deeply drawn to see. Not sure what to do other than keep looking. Would love you guidence if you see something that i'm blind to.


Best,
Geoff

[Skygazer74]

The self seems like a projection created by thoughts with "I" as the subject. By "I" we mean that which chooses and controls, the doer, The person. I'm confused though, because as i write this the answer seems to live in my intellect as apposed to being seen.

Well yes this is the intellect talking - how about in your actual experience? It is just a matter of looking rather than thinking..

And don't worry, the glimpses are important, so keep doing what is creating the glimpses. When thoughts arise remember you can open into the space of awareness and DE.

It's so interesting, at work, and with family and friends I slip back into the old paradigm. When I actively do DE, i start to see the truth. I'm not yet seeing it cross over into my life

Is there an expectation here I wonder? In communication it is inevitable that everything will seem to be the same, we are obliged to use personal pronouns and respond when our name is called, so in some ways nothing changes. In some ways it all changes. Old roles continue, you will still be a friend and partner and father, and it will all arise just as it is, just without so much story/identity. But it might be worth looking at what is happening - what is the old paradigm for you? What changes when you are doing this work?

Apologies here Nic=Did you mean that the head is completely transparent or that the "me" is transparent?
Not sure I'm getting this one. Tried it a few times. When I imagined the "me" it was like this little ball of consciousness that chooses and imagines, tries to control right up in the head. Then I saw just a brain and it got a little quieter.

I gave you this because you found the apple and room imagination exercises helpful - it just means to imagine things in the space where the self seems to reside and then imagine it transparent. We think or assume something is there, this subject, this entity - but whenever we really look we cannot find this. So we just keep looking until it is crystal clear that nothing is there..
So look at the absence of seer when seeing, the absence of chooser when choosing, or doer when doing.

What you wrote about thoughts feelings, perceptions being allowed to be as they are, to arise and pass without a story of a self is something I somehow know is True and feel so deeply drawn to see. Not sure what to do other than keep looking. Would love you guidence if you see something that i'm blind to.

Yes, just keep looking and you will see. Keep it simple, in DE, there is no self, so we look and see that fact. You have seen it doesn't exist in all the ways it is assumed to exist - now it seems to be about this becoming really clear and sifting through all the defences and doubts and worries (thoughts) to that seeing. Like with the breath in meditation, we keep coming back every time we are distracted, with kindness and compassion for our'selves' (lol) and this is no different, just keep coming back :)

Why don't you make a list of the ways we have identified the self exists, and make a list of the tools or techniques that have helped you see through. A handy list of quotes and ways to look might help when the mind reverts to thinking?


Try this one:

The following exercise is designed to let you ‘feel’ the difference between actual experience and imagined experience.

Close your eyes and imagine that you are holding a spoon. Imagine the spoons form, its size, its weight, its temperature. Look and feel at the imaginary spoon for a while.

Then open your eyes … is there a spoon here, in real life?
So how did you see that there is no spoon?
What happened to the spoon?
Did it disappear or did it never exist?

Notice that there was no boom and no bright flashes of light when the imaginary spoon was no longer imagined. Remember this, the shift to seeing through the illusion of a separate self is not going to be any more than this, it is just a dropping of a belief – the belief is the glue that holds the illusion together.

Now go and get a spoon from the kitchen and hold it in the same way that you imagined it.

Feel the spoon’s form, its size, its weight, its temperature.
Close your eyes and feel the spoon for a while.

Now open your eyes … is there a spoon here, in real life?
Are the image of the spoon and the experience of the spoon the same?
How does imagining and experiencing the same thing differ?

Now close your eyes again and bring your attention to the image of “me”, the separate individual entity. Spend some time exploring this, and then answer the following question:

Is it an image or is it an actual entity?

The questions are really just there for you to consider as you do the exercise, I do not need detailed answers to each one, just some reflections on how the exercise went for you, or if you have any questions or need any clarification.

[Geoff]

Hi Nic,

I went kind of hard today, kept doing numerous exercises, looking for the "me". I walked around in the park for a few hours just looking. I did have a few glimpses again. What I basically saw for a few moments was that there was no noticer- just noticing, no doer- just doing- no feeler (this was less obvious) feelign, seeing, hearing, thinking. Things got quiet and there was just this flow. From this vantage point the self is just the empty contents thought not seen as a thought.
One thing I noticed was that when as I was kind of saying to myself "there never was a "me" zero, empty. I would remember this childhood trauma and kind of get stuck. Not sure why but I'll keep looking.

So look at the absence of seer when seeing, the absence of chooser when choosing, or doer when doing.

If you have a good exercise for the absense of feeler when feeling that would be great!

Do you mean a list of how we have seen the self doesn't exist?
No Noticer- just noticing
No chooser- just actions being take
no doer- just doing
No senser- just sensing
No thinker- just thoughts arising
No presence in the "body" just sensations
No idenity- just a story of a "me", a name, a "history", a "personality"

I"ll get you a list of the exercises as well.

Then open your eyes … is there a spoon here, in real life?
So how did you see that there is no spoon?
What happened to the spoon?
Did it disappear or did it never exist?

The spoon never existed, I was able to see that by simply looking.

Are the image of the spoon and the experience of the spoon the same?
How does imagining and experiencing the same thing differ?

The image of the spoon is different than the experience of the spoon. The image has less dimension to it. The experience- image + sensations creates a more full experience of the spoon.

Imagining is like 2d and experiencing like 4d when it comes to the spoon.

Interesting when I imagine "me" I saw an image of my self as a body noticing, choosing, doing, understanding, seeing. Fascinating. That is exactly what the belief is. the "me" as a mind animating a body.
I had to pause for a few minutes before i could answer your question- is that an actual entity? There is a belief that that is an actual entity but I have not seen it when I have looked. only the verbing of those things and not the owner of any of it. (the feelings one is still more intellectual). Is that the Santa Claus? I can't understand how I could maintain this belief if I haven't seen the "me" as the controller or owner of experience. It's like i'm mentally stuttering or something. Is that image an accurate depiction of reality? Can we talk more about this and how it relates to the other steps of the exercise?
the imagining of the spoon and the holding of the spoon vs seeing it?

Thanks!
Geoff

[Skygazer74]

One thing I noticed was that when as I was kind of saying to myself "there never was a "me" zero, empty. I would remember this childhood trauma and kind of get stuck. Not sure why but I'll keep looking.
So look at the absence of seer when seeing, the absence of chooser when choosing, or doer when doing.
If you have a good exercise for the absense of feeler when feeling that would be great!

So it sounds like this might be the block - around feelings, particularly feelings in relation to trauma. Again, just to be clear, this is not trauma therapy but a way to help you look and see that none of it is yours, none of it defines or creates a self - even if that is what we have believed our whole life! (Just like we believe in Santa Claus, until we do not! We imagine, project, and create our world, and imagine it divided between self and other, so it is so useful to see the difference between this and DE/reality. We can talk more about this if you like, but first I want to really go into this area of feelings/trauma)

So, in DE, can you find the story?

When there is emotion or feelings, try to drop out of the story and into the actual experience of them (usually in the body, and of course there will be thoughts that interpret and identify, and describe our 'self' in relation or response to these stories and feelings) and in that DE, look for the entity to whom the emotion belongs. Look for the one whose story is being described by thought. Or, more simply, look for something feeling those sensations in the body. Like with sight and sound which we did and you saw so clearly, simply see if there is anyone sensing the sensations.



Let me know how you go with that please?

I understand that this may seem tough, and even seem a little bit like bypassing, but we are trying to do something specific, so it is important to look into memory and story. One one level there is or seems to be a historical narrative, and something called 'the past,' but can you actually find 'the past' other than as a thought?


Try this one:

Almost everybody believes that a memory thought is referring to something that has happened. That a memory thought is a different thought than a non-memory thought.

Please don’t go to thought explanations, but just let a memory be there, and look at it. Look at what is actually going on and not what thoughts say - but what actually is.

What is memory exactly?
What is the memory ‘made of’?
WHEN does the memory appear?

What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘memory’ thought?
How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened?

Then, look at a thought about the future.
What is the future thought ‘made of’?
WHEN does the future thought appear?
What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘future’ thought?
How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘future’ thought refers to something that will happen?

Then let’s compare a thought about past and a thought about the future.
What is the EXACT difference between the thoughts about past and future?
If there is difference and how is that difference is known exactly?


There is quite a lot to reflect on here, I hope it is not overload but I am really celebrating your hard work and breakthroughs!

Best wishes,

Nic

[Geoff]

Thanks NIc,
I'll get on this. I wanted to share quickly that the last exercise was great. I saw for a moment how the Geoff story looked from the perspective of thought: A person walking around inside a body. Everything stopped For a few minutes there I was like. Is this is? Was it seen? Was the bubble popped? I then wrote down some of things i was looking for in case there are some sublte expectations in the way.
I imagine the same thoughts and feelings arising but that they are further away, less personal, less biting, urgent. further what i noticed was there wasn't resistance to these feelings. For a second life didn't seem personal. On the flip side there was life as a flow of experience. I"m not thinking that I"ll live in a bliss state or anything like that. Not sure why i was drawn to write this at this moment but i'm also getting glimpses that often choices are being made without a me choosing and there is a sense to follow this and not second guess or edit it.

Looking forward to the exercises!
Geoff

[Geoff]

Hi Nic,

We can talk more about this if you like, but first I want to really go into this area of feelings/trauma)

Let's do it!

Absolutely no story in DE. No story of anything at all, let alone trauma.

Looking for the feeler- I"m still looking. The one tricky part here is there seems to be a reaction or resistance to the feeling.
That inner, preverbal "no!" must be thought but it seems unconscious. Not sure how that fits in. Thought that isnt' seen? i'm not finding a feeler but what's tricky is that if there is no feeler than what is responding with such resistance? I will spend more time on this Nic.

It makes sense that the past can only exist as now thought. There isn't a "past" per se other than the movie thought brings about it. I don't think your saying that events did not occur for the current experience.

A memory is a thougth that refers to a previous event. LIke all thoughts it's an interpretation or painting. Photograph.
It seems like a series of slides about this said event. It's made purely of thought. Memories seem to appear either randomly or in response to a request- do you remember this event?

There is no difference between a memory thougth or general thougth other than a memory thought or series of thoughts tells a narrative. A general thought could be an answer to a question or problem. but it's all the same thought fabric as it were.

I don't know how it's known exactly that a memory thought refers to something that has happened. I never questioned this. I remember i was married 25 years ago. How do I know that? How do I know my name is Geoff or the name of any label? People have been calling me that. Is that not a form of memory? It a court the answer would be corrobating witnesses but here we don't have that. It's a good question. I think the honest answer is that you don't know if a memory refers to smething that happened but this is curious then we have to say that a spoon may be called something else.

A future thought is the same, made of just thought, appears randomly or as a response, can't be known to be refer to something that will happen.

i think i have to say there is no difference between past and future thoughts though i know my name is Geoff and I remember I was married 25 years so that does seem different. AGain I really have no clue how that difference is known. You stumped me!! (i'll keep looking!)
Best
Geoff

[Skygazer74]

Nice looking! Yes, events happened, they just didn't happen to anything like a 'you.' As you saw, thoughts weave these moments together to create a story, but in DE, no such story can be found.

Looking for the feeler- I"m still looking. The one tricky part here is there seems to be a reaction or resistance to the feeling.
That inner, preverbal "no!" must be thought but it seems unconscious. Not sure how that fits in. Thought that isnt' seen? i'm not finding a feeler but what's tricky is that if there is no feeler than what is responding with such resistance? I will spend more time on this Nic.

So resistance is arising, and interesting that it seems preverbal. How is it known to be preverbal? Yes look again, what is responding?

Resistance is common, and there is a video Ilona made about it you might be interested in- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBEn40-pIfs
She suggests using resistance to show you what needs to be explored - so what is is showing you?

In a way, whether you see the difference between a future and a past thought is not the crux of the matter - it is about recognising the activity of thought in the creation of story and identity. Thought creates this and with that comes this assumed self. That is all we need to see, and you are seeing it, but then thought creates resistance, as if to protect the fruit of its labour, as if to protect an illusion!

I enjoyed reading the post prior - that sounds very much like the experience of having seen. Look for those moments, and simply observe how resistance returns or thought gets in the way. There is clear seeing, there is thinking, and it is all fine, since there is no seer or thinker and it is all just happening perfectly as it is. Then, when thinking is seen for what it is, thinking will cease to disturb that seeing so much. There is a beautiful phrase by a Tibetan teacher: Once you see that awareness is as boundless as space, thought will never have the power to disturb you again. So look into that awareness and see that it is unlimited! Or, in the style of guiding - can you find a boundary in awareness, anywhere?

Since we are looking at time though:

There is a general assumption that there is linear time that started (if started at all) somewhere very far in the past and advances to the distant future. The present moment (now) is considered to be a very small fragment of time, or an event that is moving forward on a linear line, coming from the past and advancing to the future.

But is there an experience of the ’now’ moving along the line of time?
Any experience of one ‘moment’ giving way to the next?
Is there any actual or direct experience of one event following another?

How fast is the ‘present moment’ actually moving?
Just look at 'this moment', can you find a point where it began?
How long does the ‘now’ last?
Where does the ‘now’ start, and where does it end?
When does the ‘now’ exactly become the 'past'?
What is the ‘past’ in actual experience?
So is there actual experience of ‘time’ or thoughts about ‘time’?


Best wishes,

Nic

[Geoff]

Hi Nic,

Let me just start by saying thank you for your selfless and patient guidance. I'm deeply grateful for this opportunity.

Yes! I"m seeing memory as thought recounting events through the story of a me. It's just like saying cup or my cup. My experience or experience. You probably know the story of the blind men and the elephant. Each one creates a story of part of the elephant they are touching. In the case of memory it's adding a me. When i look back at the childhood "trauma" (I don't know what other word to use) i'm glimpsing that an event happened to this body, thoughts of fear arose, and the body froze. Then more thought arose interpreting this event. IN my case- the memory was buried in the subconscious (but there is no subconscious in DE??) and after experiencing all this contraction suddenly the memory came up 40 years later. It seems obvious that a belief was created and drove behavior. This is actually kind of a question. Where do these hidden or unconscious beliefs reside? IF you find a person who is driven for success at all costs and doesnt' know why, can we not say that there is a hidden belief that success will make him feel worthy? But again, where do these hidden beliefs reside? They cannot be found in DE?

The relevance of this question for our enquiry is that I think the separate self was kind of crystalized around these traumatic events. NONE of this chosen. They happened. I can see how that is impersonal. From that perspective trauma is impersonal.
There was no I that buried a memory. The memory of the event was buried. Or was it? Would appreciate your help with this.

How is it known to be preverbal? Yes look again, what is responding?

it's not known to be preverbal. That's a thought that was believed. (i'm how do thoughts get believed or not believed?- Sorry, so many questions!) I can't see a thought that says "I don't want this feeling!" There just the sensation and then an aversion to this sensation. Is aversion thought? It seems more like a bracing or contracting against. Could resistance be a thought that i'm just not aware of? When people look in DE can they find the thought of "No!"? In my looking I can't find the thought but there is a feeling of threat. How do I exactly know it's a feeling of threat? Hmmmm.. must be thought but i'm still not seeing it. Nic, I sense that Resistance is an important topic of inquiry as it's strong in relationship to the self. Logically it makes sense that resistance is thought, as i've experienced that awareness allows everything but that's just a concept for me right now. I want to see it. I really want to see it!

what is is showing you?

Great question. it seems that the reaction of resistance itself is showing me. The thought/feeling of resistance? not sure, and I'm coming to love not knowing as there is something to see.

No boundary to Awareness- it's by definition boundless, formless. it's not possible for the mind to grasp it in any way. Awareness can only be known in DE. In DE it's that "suchness" you were talking about. Words fail.

But is there an experience of the ’now’ moving along the line of time?
Any experience of one ‘moment’ giving way to the next?
Is there any actual or direct experience of one event following another?

How fast is the ‘present moment’ actually moving?
Just look at 'this moment', can you find a point where it began?
How long does the ‘now’ last?
Where does the ‘now’ start, and where does it end?
When does the ‘now’ exactly become the 'past'?
What is the ‘past’ in actual experience?
So is there actual experience of ‘time’ or thoughts about ‘time’?

No experience of the now moving. There just is this. No experience of distinct moments, just seamless flow.
No beginning, the moment doesnt' last. All this constructed by the mind.

There are only thoughts about time. So time is essentially a mental construct. Useful and practical. (dont be late to that appointment!) but not real.... Which brings us probably to space. Ie Is there a "here" and a "there" or is that also just thought. Where is the boundary between here and there? (there isn't) What about people? Is there such thing as a community? Or is that also just make believe? Yet we use these conventions to go through life

I know I've written a lot here Nic. (it wasn't a me doing it :) Seriously, I'm catching on a little to the direction of this enquiry and things are becoming a little more obvious. I think the sticking point is still around resistance to sensations. I can't find a me that these unpleasant sensations are occuring to. Yet there is much resistance to these sensations.

Thanks again
Geoff