Ldub & Forgetmenot

[Ldub]

Hi Kay -

So what exactly is it that will "surrender to what is"?

Ugh! I guess nothing will surrender to what is, because there's nothing there to surrender. It's a thought followed by another thought and the thought that says 'i'm the ego/i'm the crazy one/i'm the good one/i'm the sane thought/etc/etc/etc and when that uptight one gets less space, things will be different". Infinite thoughts.

The thought keeps coming - why in the world would awareness want to have these thoughts? Doesn't it have anything better to do?

What is it exactly that needs surrendering to? What is it that needs surrendering?

What needs surrendering to: Letting go of the tiller - letting go of the thought there's an 'I' that's doing anything.
What is it that needs surrendering: The thought that says the uptight/controlling thought needs to surrender.

[forgetmenot]

Hi Lisa,

The thought keeps coming - why in the world would awareness want to have these thoughts? Doesn't it have anything better to do?

And here is the idea that there is an awareness, which is a some thing that is having thoughts/thinking thoughts! Where can this awareness be found exactly? Describe this awareness to me in detail and tell me where it is located? LOOK and see if you can find anyone or anything that can be defined as awareness? Awaring is happening...but can you find anything that is actually awaring?

There is still a desire to identify as a something. If it’s not an illusory separate self then I must be something that is called Awareness that is thinking, doing, feeling etc. What behaviours and qualities does this awareness have exactly?

I want you to look very carefully at the following pointer

Where does a thought end, and the knowing of it begin? Is there a border between a thought and the knowing of it?
Is there a distance between a thought and the knowing of it or is that just an imaginary distance?

Is there any substance present in thinking other than the knowing of it?
- Go to the experience of thinking and go to the experience of knowing about thinking. Are they two different experiences or is it the same experience?

What is it exactly that needs surrendering to? What is it that needs surrendering?

What needs surrendering to: Letting go of the tiller - letting go of the thought there's an 'I' that's doing anything.

You aren’t looking. You are still referring to a someone/something that has a hand on the tiller and can let go of it or that has to let go. You are still referring to a someone/something that is the thinker of thoughts and therefore can let go of or stop thoughts.
Where is this someone/something that can do this? Where in sound, thought, colour, smell, taste or sensation can you find this someone/something?

What is it that needs surrendering: The thought that says the uptight/controlling thought needs to surrender.

Are you the author of that thought? Go back to the thought exercises and redo them if necessary! Because, if you're not the thinker of thought, then how could the "I" in, "how do I stop this", or “how do I surrender” refer to you? What does that “I” refer to in actual experience? LOOK instead of thinking!!!


Kay

[Ldub]

Hi Kay -

I'm still sitting with this - I will respond tomorrow. Definitely see that there's a desire to identify as something here. . . I'm seeing that if 'I' identify as 'Awareness' instead of 'I' then the identify just gets shifted, but there's still a separation.

[forgetmenot]

I'm still sitting with this - I will respond tomorrow. Definitely see that there's a desire to identify as something here. . . I'm seeing that if 'I' identify as 'Awareness' instead of 'I' then the identify just gets shifted, but there's still a separation.

Yes. Calling yourself Awareness and not I or Lisa....changes nothing. There is still a someone/something that is seeking and that life is happening to. I look forward to your post.

To find out whether something is actually seen and heard, or only thought of, simply check:-
Can it be seen, heard, touched, smelled or tasted. If not, it’s a thought.
In the seen, there is only the seen.
In the heard, there is only the heard.
In the sensed, there is only the sensed.
In the thought, there is only the thought.

Kay

[Ldub]

Hi Kay -

Can it be seen, heard, touched, smelled or tasted. If not, it’s a thought.
In the seen, there is only the seen.
In the heard, there is only the heard.
In the sensed, there is only the sensed.
In the thought, there is only the thought.

Thanks for reminding me of this, it's very helpful.

And here is the idea that there is an awareness, which is a some thing that is having thoughts/thinking thoughts! Where can this awareness be found exactly? Describe this awareness to me in detail and tell me where it is located? LOOK and see if you can find anyone or anything that can be defined as awareness? Awaring is happening...but can you find anything that is actually awaring?

I can't see, touch, hear, smell or taste anything labeled 'awareness', so it's a thought. A thought labeled 'Awareness'. I can't find anything that is actually awaring.

Where does a thought end, and the knowing of it begin? Is there a border between a thought and the knowing of it?
Is there a distance between a thought and the knowing of it or is that just an imaginary distance?

The thought happens, and the knowing of the thought happens next. There's no border between the two thoughts, and no distance. There is an awareness of one, then the other. When you said there's no way to have 2 thoughts at the same time, it occurs like this - one thought appears, then the knowing of the thought appears.

Is there any substance present in thinking other than the knowing of it?
- Go to the experience of thinking and go to the experience of knowing about thinking. Are they two different experiences or is it the same experience?

There's no substance present in thinking. The experience of thinking and knowing about thinking are the same experience.

Where is this someone/something that can do this? Where in sound, thought, colour, smell, taste or sensation can you find this someone/something?

I can't find a someone/thing that can let go of the tiller in sound, color, smell, taste or sensation. I do find it in thought - thought labeled 'I' with thought content 'choice of letting go or not'. When I then look for the AE of 'I' - there's nothing to be found. From previous exercises I've seen 'choice' can't be found either.

In this process with you, there's the experience of the direct exercises you give me that make things very clear and distinct. Then the 'what if', 'why' or 'well then how' thoughts come rushing in. I would call this the protective mechanism of ego, but there's no AE of 'ego' and I'm learning there's just What Is. I appreciate your patience through this process Kay!

Are you the author of that thought? Go back to the thought exercises and redo them if necessary! Because, if you're not the thinker of thought, then how could the "I" in, "how do I stop this", or “how do I surrender” refer to you? What does that “I” refer to in actual experience? LOOK instead of thinking!!!

No, I'm not the author of that thought. The AE of 'I' in that experience is thought labeled 'I', thought labeled 'surrender' and thoughts about thoughts ABOUT what that means.

Thank you,
Lisa

[forgetmenot]

Hi Lisa,

Where does a thought end, and the knowing of it begin? Is there a border between a thought and the knowing of it?
Is there a distance between a thought and the knowing of it or is that just an imaginary distance?

The thought happens, and the knowing of the thought happens next. There's no border between the two thoughts, and no distance. There is an awareness of one, then the other. When you said there's no way to have 2 thoughts at the same time, it occurs like this - one thought appears, then the knowing of the thought appears.

Look again….are not thought and the knowing of thought instantaneous? Is there really a time lapse between thought and the knowing of it? Can a thought appear without the knowing of it? Are you able to separate a thought from the “knowing” of it?

Is there any substance present in thinking other than the knowing of it?
- Go to the experience of thinking and go to the experience of knowing about thinking. Are they two different experiences or is it the same experience?

There's no substance present in thinking. The experience of thinking and knowing about thinking are the same experience.

Try looking for a thought. When you try looking, you realise you cannot find it. You can only find the label “thought” and thoughts as some mirage-like arisings. You can see that even the word “arisings” is a thought, and both labels 'thought' and 'arising' are some mirage-like arisings!

See thoughts for what they are and not what thought says they are. When you did the thought exercise….you noticed that thoughts arose and subsided…but there was no knowing where they came from or where they went. Why? Because a thought is not a thing. A thought isn't known because of its appearance or its content...it is known because it is THIS/experience. Just like colour isn’t known because it is a colour or that it is an appearance...it is known because it is THIS/experience. Thought is THIS/experience and experience is always here…SEEMINGLY taking different forms. It is just thought that says thought is something other than experience!

Are you the author of that thought? Go back to the thought exercises and redo them if necessary! Because, if you're not the thinker of thought, then how could the "I" in, "how do I stop this", or “how do I surrender” refer to you? What does that “I” refer to in actual experience? LOOK instead of thinking!!!

No, I'm not the author of that thought. The AE of 'I' in that experience is thought labeled 'I', thought labeled 'surrender' and thoughts about thoughts ABOUT what that means.

Is “I” a place where thoughts appear, or is “I” a thought that arises and subsides by itself?

This may be surprising, but thought doesn't stop telling you that it's your car, your job, your body, your craving, your preference, your pain, your happiness, your suffering, your this and your that. Why would thought stop saying something just because it's seen what thoughts are? It's never been any other way. So it is only an expectation that thought will suddenly change its tune or show up differently, or not at all.

In this process with you, there's the experience of the direct exercises you give me that make things very clear and distinct. Then the 'what if', 'why' or 'well then how' thoughts come rushing in. I would call this the protective mechanism of ego, but there's no AE of 'ego' and I'm learning there's just What Is. I appreciate your patience through this process Kay!

You’re welcome. I can only point. It is up to you to look each and every time thought suggests there is a you of any description or label. Yes, it becomes tedious, but it is the repetitious seeing that no “I” is found that brings the realisation. Diligence is required. There is no direct experience of no self. The realisation is not about there being no such entity as ‘no self’ - there has never been one…so how can an absence of a ‘no self’ be experienced? It is simply the noting of an absence of a self. So it is not about "Oh look, there is the experience of no self"; it is realising that any sense of self is seen to be not real; that on scrutiny, there is no substance of self that underlies the object or thought.

Okay…we are going to do an experiment on the idea of there being a see-er who is seeing objects ie the idea of separation. For this experiment we are only looking at colour.

Sit in a chair somewhere quiet and take in a couple of deep breaths to settle the dust.

Take your time with this experiment and do it several times. Start to notice just the body, the chair, floor, rugs, furniture, objects and walls. Without thought, all there is, is colour which thought then labels as clothes, or body, chair, wall and so on.

Now look carefully.
Just notice what is seen of the body. Notice that no head can be seen, and not all of the body can be seen either. Thought chimes in and says something like “that body is mine”, “that is me”. Just notice the thoughts and put them aside. Just notice all thoughts as they arise throughout this experiment and put them aside and just look from the place of open curiosity…not going to thoughts to tell you what is going on or what is being seen.

So, with thoughts about a body being put aside, what the actual experience of the body is, is colour.

Now look at the chair that you are sitting on. Once again ignore the thoughts and labels and notice that the actual experience of the chair is simply colour.

1. Can a dividing line between the colour labelled ‘body’ and the colour labelled ‘chair’ be found?

Continue on like this for the rest of the experiment

2. Is there a dividing line between the colour labelled ‘chair’ and the colour labelled ‘floor/rug’?

3. Can a dividing line between the colour labelled ‘floor/rug’ and colour labelled ‘furniture’ be found?

Is there ‘space’ between ‘floor/rug’ and the ‘furniture’ or is there just simply colour

4. Can a dividing line between the colour labelled ‘floor/rug and furniture’ and the colour labelled ‘wall’ be found?

Is there ‘space’ between ‘floor/rug’, ‘furniture’ and the ‘wall’ or is there just the actual experience of colour (seeingseen)?

5. Is there any actual dividing between any of these colours, or is there just seamless colour which thought divides into different objects, with different labels and seeming space between them; and then further divides them into different colours?

What did you find doing this experiment?

Is there such a thing as space or distance?

Is there an actual body/you sitting in a chair, or all there is, is colour?

Did you come across anyone or anything that is actually seeing colour, or is seeingseen and colour one and the same? If they are one and the same then where is the me or Awareness that is seeing them? Is the seeingseen not just happening without a someone/something that is doing the seeingseen? Could a doer of seeingseen be found?

When you look carefully…can you actually find anyone/anything that is doing this experiment, who is doing the looking, or is looking just happening without any doer being found?

Kay

[Ldub]

Hi Kay -

Look again….are not thought and the knowing of thought instantaneous? Is there really a time lapse between thought and the knowing of it? Can a thought appear without the knowing of it? Are you able to separate a thought from the “knowing” of it?

When I slow it down I see that the thought appears along with the knowing of it, there's not a lapse. A thought can't appear without the knowing of it. The knowing of the thought comes along with the thought.

A thought isn't known because of its appearance or its content...it is known because it is THIS/experience. Just like colour isn’t known because it is a colour or that it is an appearance...it is known because it is THIS/experience. Thought is THIS/experience and experience is always here…SEEMINGLY taking different forms.

THIS (above) I'm getting. I felt a shift since our last email and after reading this. THIS/experience is everything AND the AE of THIS/experience is using the technology of language to attempt to describe/differentiate simply WHAT IS/experience.

Is “I” a place where thoughts appear, or is “I” a thought that arises and subsides by itself?

'I' is a thought that arises/subsides by itself.

Why would thought stop saying something just because it's seen what thoughts are? It's never been any other way.

Got it - yes!

. Can a dividing line between the colour labelled ‘body’ and the colour labelled ‘chair’ be found?

No.

2. Is there a dividing line between the colour labelled ‘chair’ and the colour labelled ‘floor/rug’?

3. Can a dividing line between the colour labelled ‘floor/rug’ and colour labelled ‘furniture’ be found?

No to each of these questions.

Is there ‘space’ between ‘floor/rug’, ‘furniture’ and the ‘wall’ or is there just the actual experience of colour (seeingseen)?

This one is sticky. AE is only color tho.

5. Is there any actual dividing between any of these colours, or is there just seamless colour which thought divides into different objects, with different labels and seeming space between them; and then further divides them into different colours?

There's no actual dividing between the colors, just thoughts dividing them. I must say, the seeming space is the most challenging. If it's just the AE of color, not sensation, then space is just color also.

What did you find doing this experiment?
Is there such a thing as space or distance?

Not according to the AE of color. AE of sensation is different - the sensation of seeming space is different than color labeled 'chair' and color labeled 'floor'.

Is there an actual body/you sitting in a chair, or all there is, is colour?

Color.

Did you come across anyone or anything that is actually seeing colour, or is seeingseen and colour one and the same? If they are one and the same then where is the me or Awareness that is seeing them? Is the seeingseen not just happening without a someone/something that is doing the seeingseen? Could a doer of seeingseen be found?

There's no AE of a seer. The seeingseen is just happening, without a doer to be found.

When you look carefully…can you actually find anyone/anything that is doing this experiment, who is doing the looking, or is looking just happening without any doer being found?

The doer can't be found.

This feels very challenging to get this. How is it that 2 people have 2 different experiences while sitting across from each other if all that is is THIS/experience? Argh!!

[forgetmenot]

Hello Lisa,

It's time I bring out the zen stick.

Look again….are not thought and the knowing of thought instantaneous? Is there really a time lapse between thought and the knowing of it? Can a thought appear without the knowing of it? Are you able to separate a thought from the “knowing” of it?

When I slow it down I see that the thought appears along with the knowing of it, there's not a lapse. A thought can't appear without the knowing of it. The knowing of the thought comes along with the thought.

No…the thought appears in/as knowing…not the other way round. When have you ever experienced knowing to not be? THIS/experience isn’t known because of colour, sound, taste, thought, smell, sensation. They are known because they are made of THIS! When all the labels are dropped....there is no knowing that what is appearing is colour, sound, smell, taste, sensation or thought. What is appearing is THIS, exactly as it is.

THIS/experience is everything AND the AE of THIS/experience is using the technology of language to attempt to describe/differentiate simply WHAT IS/experience.

What??? Where is THIS/experience which you are trying to define into a thing that is doing that? Where in colour, thought, taste, smell, sensation, sound can you find anything that is “is using the technology of language to attempt to describe/differentiate simply WHAT IS/experience”. There is no AE of THIS/experience. It is unknowable, indescribable.

Describe each of the following as if to someone who has come from another planet and doesn't know of these things
Describe the smell labelled 'banana'.
Describe the colour labelled 'pink'
Describe the taste labelled 'coffee'
Describe the sensation labelled 'tickle'
Describe the sound labelled 'bird'
Describe thought labelled 'thought'.

You are not looking. I asked you at the beginning of this thread to break down all experiences into AE...because it was the key...but you aren't and have not been doing that since the initial exercises.

1. What is the AE of language?
2. What is the AE of these words that are being read now?
3. What is the AE of technology?

You are so wanting to find out what you really are and that is a question that cannot be answered. It is much simpler to look and see what you are not. You are so wanting answers to find what is reading, what is looking, what is doing...that no matter how many experiments you do and find no one/no thing...that it isn't enough for you. You are allowing thoughts to dictate to you even though, you are seeing, through your own experimentations that there is nothing found to be doing anything...and yet you still persist in there being something doing something. You are waiting for the idea of the separate self to disappear for you to know that it doesn’t exist and then to simply replace it something you are now calling THIS/experience...previously it was Awareness...and in a hares breath, you dropped Awareness and now using THIS!! The idea of the separate self will not disappear. It has always been. What this whole investigation is about is become aware of the fact that there is no separate self...and this is confirmed each time you look...that it doesn't matter if thought keeps saying that "I feel like a me"...because that isn't going to stop. There has never been a me and the idea of a separate me has always arisen. You need to LOOK each time it suggests this. We are getting nowhere fast because of a need you have to have something to identify with and as.

Is “I” a place where thoughts appear, or is “I” a thought that arises and subsides by itself?

'I' is a thought that arises/subsides by itself.

And did you actually sit quietly to watch this happening…or did you just go with what you have already done and gone with that answer?

Why would thought stop saying something just because it's seen what thoughts are? It's never been any other way.

Got it - yes!

I don’t think you have. You are not seeing your beliefs, instead your beliefs are telling you what to see. This is the simple difference between confusion and clarity.

Is there ‘space’ between ‘floor/rug’, ‘furniture’ and the ‘wall’ or is there just the actual experience of colour (seeingseen)?

This one is sticky. AE is only color tho.

Why? Because thought said so?

5. Is there any actual dividing between any of these colours, or is there just seamless colour which thought divides into different objects, with different labels and seeming space between them; and then further divides them into different colours?

There's no actual dividing between the colors, just thoughts dividing them. I must say, the seeming space is the most challenging. If it's just the AE of color, not sensation, then space is just color also.

Where in the instructions was it confusing, when stipulated that we were only using colour for this experiment? Why then bring sensation into it? So, how about you do the experiment and just stick to colour and see if that brings clarity and put sensations to the side..just like you had to do with thoughts.

What did you find doing this experiment?
Is there such a thing as space or distance?

Not according to the AE of color. AE of sensation is different - the sensation of seeming space is different than color labeled 'chair' and color labeled 'floor'.
Is there an actual body/you sitting in a chair, or all there is, is colour?

Not according to the AE of colour??? Colour doesn’t have an opinion….it simply IS. Other than colour, because as the instructions stipulated..we are only looking at colour…could you find anything else but colour?

What is the AE of 'space'?
What does the sensation labelled 'space' feel like exactly, and how does it differ to sensation labelled as 'frown'?
Is it an actual sensation, or is it simply a feeling?

Did you come across anyone or anything that is actually seeing colour, or is seeingseen and colour one and the same? If they are one and the same then where is the me or Awareness that is seeing them? Is the seeingseen not just happening without a someone/something that is doing the seeingseen? Could a doer of seeingseen be found?

There's no AE of a seer. The seeingseen is just happening, without a doer to be found.

And? So no doer is found! Let that sink in! You have expectations that you are either not aware of, or are not wanting to share with me. No doer found and yet is all seems rather blasé!

This feels very challenging to get this. How is it that 2 people have 2 different experiences while sitting across from each other if all that is is THIS/experience? Argh!!

And this is how I know you are not looking! Find your own answers through looking…but you keep thinking and not looking. You don't break down experiences into AE...you just keep thinking and then wondering why you are confused with no clarity.

What is the AE of ‘other’?

One you have answered the questions in this thread I think it’s time for you to reread your entire thread, from beginning to here, before we move on. Reread it very carefully and I would even suggest you redo exercises. You answer with all the right answers…but I am not looking for the right answers. I know when you are actually looking, and I will also know when you have a shift…but for now, you are just regurgitating answers without looking or without looking deeply. We can all do that. I want you to earnestly look…which is what you are not doing.

The following was written by a person who went through the Gate, and this is what he found out was needed to have the realisation.

To see this, first, you must be 100% committed to seeing it. It can’t be a nice idea, an intellectual curiosity. You have got to pursue this as if you have no other choice.

Second, you must be open with a willingness to set aside your current beliefs about how things are and engage in rigorous inquiry. No-one can give this to you.

Your beliefs might rush in saying, “Yeah, but…”, “OK, but what about…?”, “I was taught that…”, “My other teacher or the book I read said…” All this must be pushed aside and sometimes quite aggressively.

Third, you must engage in active listening. Listen carefully to the words your guide is using. Be sure you are clear on the context within which the words are being used. Sometimes, when you review what was asked or said, you realize that what you thought you heard versus what was actually said are two different things.

Fourth, this ties in with number 2… practical application… You can’t just sit and ponder, you must apply the ideas to your life; see them in action. Do the work.

Fifth, be 100% honest with your guide and with yourself. You can’t cheat your way through this. Wherever you are in your understanding or lack thereof is fine, but your guide can’t help you if you are withholding. Withholding is unfair both to the guide and yourself.

Kay

[Ldub]

I'm reading through the thread and your last response and will post in a day or 2.

[forgetmenot]

Hi Lisa....thank you for letting me know.

Kay

[Ldub]

Hi Kay -

It took me going through the entire thread over the last 3+ hours to this very moment, to be able to say - thanks for bringing out the zen stick. Fuck! I see where thoughts and believing them has led to confusion, and a deep desire to define the experience of 'not self'. The self that is 'afraid to get it wrong' has been very active in this process, and it has led to more thinking instead of looking.

Describe the smell labelled 'banana'.
Describe the colour labelled 'pink'
Describe the taste labelled 'coffee'
Describe the sensation labelled 'tickle'
Describe the sound labelled 'bird'
Describe thought labelled 'thought'.

None of these can be described - they're indescribable.

What is the AE of language?

AE is thought labeled 'language'.

What is the AE of these words that are being read now?

AE is color.

What is the AE of technology?

AE is thought labeled 'technology'.

Is “I” a place where thoughts appear, or is “I” a thought that arises and subsides by itself?
'I' is a thought that arises/subsides by itself.
And did you actually sit quietly to watch this happening…or did you just go with what you have already done and gone with that answer?

I don't recall when I originally responded what the process was. As I consider this now, the thought 'I' arises and subsides on its own. There are times it's present, and times it isn't. 'I' isn't a place/location as there's no 'I' to be found through AE.

Not according to the AE of colour??? Colour doesn’t have an opinion….it simply IS. Other than colour, because as the instructions stipulated..we are only looking at colour…could you find anything else but colour?

Going through the exercise again, there is only color.

What is the AE of 'space'?
What does the sensation labelled 'space' feel like exactly, and how does it differ to sensation labelled as 'frown'?
Is it an actual sensation, or is it simply a feeling?

The AE of 'space' is thought. The thought labeled 'something between'.
There is no AE of sensation of 'space' - it's only thought. 'Frown' is a label and does not itself contain sensation. The best I can describe is that there's a feeling of 'space', but no AE.

What is the AE of ‘other’?

The AE of 'other' is:
thought labeled 'other', color labeled 'body', sound (if speaking), sensation (if touching).

I'm going to be traveling over the next few days and won't have much access to internet so it may take me a little longer to respond.

Thanks,
Lisa

[Ldub]

I also want to mention that I see how there's no tiller to be let go of because there's no one holding the tiller, nor a chooser that says 'let go now'. The expectation/hope that there won't be a time when a thought says 'you need to make something happen' is making me laugh now because the thought will either arise or not, but theres no 'I' that could make 'it' happen or not. If its happening, it just is.

[forgetmenot]

Hey Lisa,

Lovely post to read. Thank you for taking the time to reread your thread. I am very happy that you found some clarity! :)

It took me going through the entire thread over the last 3+ hours to this very moment, to be able to say - thanks for bringing out the zen stick. Fuck! I see where thoughts and believing them has led to confusion, and a deep desire to define the experience of 'not self'. The self that is 'afraid to get it wrong' has been very active in this process, and it has led to more thinking instead of looking.

Excellent find! Nice job! :) Can you find a self that is ‘afraid to get it wrong’, or once again is that a thought which SEEMS to be attached to an idea/feeling of a me? We will look at the body next…so this may help you along.

Describe the smell labelled 'banana'.
Describe the colour labelled 'pink'
Describe the taste labelled 'coffee'
Describe the sensation labelled 'tickle'
Describe the sound labelled 'bird'
Describe thought labelled 'thought'.

None of these can be described - they're indescribable.

Lovely, yes! What THIS is, is unknowable and is indescribable...no matter what labels or descriptions thoughts slaps on It.

There is no AE of sensation of 'space' - it's only thought. 'Frown' is a label and does not itself contain sensation. The best I can describe is that there's a feeling of 'space', but no AE.

So, I would like you to look carefully at this “feeling of space”. Is it an actual sensation or is it something along the lines of the idea like “this feels like space because it is light and empty” as opposed to “this doesn’t feel like space because it is full of heaviness”? Do either of these ‘feelings’ have an actual sensation, or are they more so, thought based ideas?

What is the AE of ‘other’?

The AE of 'other' is:
thought labeled 'other', color labeled 'body', sound (if speaking), sensation (if touching).

Yes exactly. If there is no ‘you’ who resides within a body, then how can there be others that are residing in a body ‘out there’? The idea of a 'in here' and 'out there' are all separation based. The following body exercise will help with this.

I also want to mention that I see how there's no tiller to be let go of because there's no one holding the tiller, nor a chooser that says 'let go now'. The expectation/hope that there won't be a time when a thought says 'you need to make something happen' is making me laugh now because the thought will either arise or not, but theres no 'I' that could make 'it' happen or not. If its happening, it just is.

Lovely, Lisa. And when realising this…how did you feel? You said it made you laugh…so how did it make you feel?

Okay, so let’s being to look at the idea of the body.
Sit with eyes closed for about 15 minutes.
Paying attention only to the pure sensations, without relying on thoughts or mental images:

Can it be known how tall the body is?
Does the body have a weight or volume?
Can it be known how old the body is?
In actual experience does the body have a shape or a form?

Is there a boundary between the body and the clothing?
Is there a boundary between the body and the chair?

Is there an inside or an outside of the body?
If there is an inside - inside of what exactly?
If there is an outside, the outside of what exactly?

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to?
What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

Look very carefully, especially with the last question. Take your time, don’t rush. You can look several times during the day while doing other things (like washing hands, showering, having a short break from work, walking, etc.) before replying.

Kay

PS...thank you for letting me know that you will be travelling and will take longer to respond. I appreciate your thoughtfulness.

[Ldub]

Hi Kay -

Thanks, and I'm going to get this response out to you before I hit the road.

Can you find a self that is ‘afraid to get it wrong’, or once again is that a thought which SEEMS to be attached to an idea/feeling of a me?

No, I see this as a thought/story of 'self afraid to get it wrong' - I was using this language as I'd seen you reference thoughts of 'self' in this way previously in our thread. I'm not confused about it being a thought vs thinking it's part of a 'me'.

Is it an actual sensation or is it something along the lines of the idea like “this feels like space because it is light and empty” as opposed to “this doesn’t feel like space because it is full of heaviness”? Do either of these ‘feelings’ have an actual sensation, or are they more so, thought based ideas?

I'm not entirely clear when you ask about how something 'feels' as that implies sensation. I see that the 'feeling' of 'space' is a thought of 'light and empty' - there's not AE of it, including sensation.

And when realising this…how did you feel? You said it made you laugh…so how did it make you feel?

I'll try to answer this 'feeling' question, though as I mentioned above, I'm not entirely clear what you're referencing with 'feeling'. I was re-reading page 2 of our thread and something just opened up. Like, the thought 'space' just melted and there was understanding that that was a very tricky construct held by thought - but that it was only thought. I read "Is there sound AND smell AND colour AND taste AND sensation AND thought, or are these labels pointing to something that is actually nameless, indescribable and formless? There is no AND. There is simply soundsmellcolourtastesensationthought which is synonymous with THIS/Knowing/Awareness/Consciousness (or whatever name you give it).

Whatever is appearing is all appearing in the wide open space of infinite knowing. And are you (not Lisa) that which is aware of itself seemingly appearing as every thing?" --- and that's when I started laughing. It was a holy shit moment and it felt really good. There was clarity where there had been confusion, and it actually felt like something dropped away. A feeling of 'no more searching' is the best way I can put it.

Can it be known how tall the body is?
Does the body have a weight or volume?
Can it be known how old the body is?

No to all the above.

In actual experience does the body have a shape or a form?

No - there's only sensation, color labeled 'body', thought ABOUT color labeled 'shape/form', thought as mental image 'body', thought as mental image 'shape/form'.

Is there a boundary between the body and the clothing?
Is there a boundary between the body and the chair?

No - AE is sensation, thought (boundary) and color (color and thought of 'body', color of 'clothing', color of 'chair')

Is there an inside or an outside of the body?
If there is an inside - inside of what exactly?
If there is an outside, the outside of what exactly?

NO - there's no inside of outside of the body. Inside/outside is thought.

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to?
What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

The word/label 'body' actually refers to the AE of the body as color, sensation, thought labeled 'body', mental image labeled 'body'.
However, the actual experience of the body - is that there isn't one. There's nothing that indicates that 'body' exists.

I'll keep looking at 'body' as I travel but if there's no 'space', no inside/outside, no boundary between body/clothing/sensation/sound/etc then there's no body. Just a concept/thought.

Thanks Kay! :)

[forgetmenot]

Hi Lisa,

Is it an actual sensation or is it something along the lines of the idea like “this feels like space because it is light and empty” as opposed to “this doesn’t feel like space because it is full of heaviness”? Do either of these ‘feelings’ have an actual sensation, or are they more so, thought based ideas?

I'm not entirely clear when you ask about how something 'feels' as that implies sensation. I see that the 'feeling' of 'space' is a thought of 'light and empty' - there's not AE of it, including sensation.
And when realising this…how did you feel? You said it made you laugh…so how did it make you feel?

Do you remember the following question? It was in the drink experiment on choosing. This is what I am getting at when I ask is it an actual sensation or is it just a feeling.

Sometimes we describe this sense of choosing as a ‘feeling’: It feels like ‘I’ did the ‘choosing’. But the question is, can a feeling ‘choose’? Is it in the nature of a feeling to ‘choose’?

Whatever is appearing is all appearing in the wide open space of infinite knowing. And are you (not Lisa) that which is aware of itself seemingly appearing as every thing?" --- and that's when I started laughing. It was a holy shit moment and it felt really good. There was clarity where there had been confusion, and it actually felt like something dropped away. A feeling of 'no more searching' is the best way I can put it.

Great! Lovely to read, and nice to read that the searching has ceased…so how does that feel…not having the seeking/searching feeling? When I ask that question…was there a feeling of light heartedness, relief, joy?? And when clarity happened…how did that feel? Did it feel lighter in the body, in the head…was there peace? I am wanting you to take note…because with perception shifts there are feelings…and you must have had feelings of some description because you started laughing and something dropped away.

Is there an inside or an outside of the body?
If there is an inside - inside of what exactly?
If there is an outside, the outside of what exactly?

NO - there's no inside of outside of the body. Inside/outside is thought.

So is there a me ‘here’ inside, and an outside world ‘there’. Can a ‘here’ and ‘there’ be found?

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to?
What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

The word/label 'body' actually refers to the AE of the body as color, sensation,
thought labeled 'body', mental image labeled 'body'.
However, the actual experience of the body - is that there isn't one. There's nothing that indicates that 'body' exists.

Exactly…the AE of ‘body’ = thought. The word/LABEL 'body' is AE of thought. Thought points to sensations, colours etc and bundles them together and labels them as ‘body/me/I’…so there are only thoughts about a body…but as actual experience a body isn’t known.

I'll keep looking at 'body' as I travel but if there's no 'space', no inside/outside, no boundary between body/clothing/sensation/sound/etc then there's no body. Just a concept/thought.

Just to clarify. Concepts are not a problem. There is a difference between a concept and a belief. The body, for example is a concept. To say "I am the body" is a belief. Concepts are not a problem. The concept of the body is not a problem; however the belief that you are the body or reside in a body is a problem. Why? Because the belief is that the concept 'body', refers to something that is real. What is conceptualised doesn't exist in the way it is conceptualised. To believe that concepts actually relate to what is REAL in/as experience, is a problem. So the concept of 'person' is not a problem, it is the belief that "I am a person" that is the problem because the concept of being a person is being related to as being REAL.

Let me know if you are unable to do the following experiment due to lack of mirror whilst travelling.

Here is an even deeper investigation of the body. Please follow each step, don't leave out any. Take your time. Don't move to the next step until the previous one is clearly seen. Repeat the exercise several times.

Stand in front of a bigger mirror.

(1) First, close the eyes and feel the sensations labelled ‘body’.

(2) Then open the eyes and look into the mirror while still paying attention to the sensations.

Is there any connection between the felt sensations and the image in the mirror?
Or just thoughts (and/or mental images) suggest that there is?


(3) While still paying attention to the sensations move one hand and observe the movement from the mirror.

Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and image of movement in the mirror?

(4) Now do the same movement with the hand, but this time look at the hand directly, not from the mirror.

Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and the image ‘of movement’?
Or only thoughts suggest it?

(5) Now, pay attention only to the image in the mirror.

Does the image by itself suggest in any way that is ‘you’ or ‘your body’?
Does the image itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘body’ at all?
Or are there only colours and shapes?

(6) Where the mirror ends, some parts of the body (probably legs) cannot be seen.

Just by the image in the mirror, is there any ‘knowledge’ that there must be legs, or only thoughts and mental images suggest so?

(7) Now turn away from the mirror and look forward (don’t look directly to any body parts).

Is there a ‘body’ anywhere when all thoughts and images are ignored, or are there only sensations?

(8) Start to walk slowly.

Is there a ‘body walking’, or are there only sensations?
Is there actual experience of ‘walking’ at all?
Or just THOUGHTS ABOUT ‘walking’?
Can such a thing as ‘body’ be found OR just THOUGHTS ABOUT a ‘body’?
Can such a thing as ‘walking’ be found?

(9) Are the sensations localized in space, like ‘going through the room’; OR is there only an image that is labelled ‘room’ and appearing sensations without any location?

Kay