1) Is there a separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form?
Was there ever?
2) Share in your own words what the illusion of separate self is and how it shows up in experience. Also, through your inquiry, what is different now?
There never was a separate self being experienced. What was always being experienced was arising phenomena - thoughts sensations and perceptions. Thoughts make claims about there being an 'I' which is separate from the rest of experience: they claim that thoughts and sensations happen inside a body, and that perception is evidence of an outside world. But where's the evidence of this in experience? The body arises as images - images which are seen but which can't think or know anything themselves- rather they are known. When an image of 'my face' or another face comes up - what's the difference? Both just an image. Thoughts arise as words and pictures. What is the actual experience of 'I am hungry' for example? There's the arising thought-words, an arising sensation, maybe a mental image of the stomach to support the storyline, maybe even the image of a sandwich. The arisings match up with one another in terms of storyline, but all that has been experienced are arisings, only arisings. Where is the 'I' part, 'the one' who it all happens TO? There is no other place, outside of experience, where it could be. All of the experience of being hungry has been explored and no person has been found in it. Its' existence is claimed in the content of a thought, but there's nothing more than the claim itself to be found.
What is different now is when thought content arises which isn't useful to what's going on, it is soon dropped. It may be believed to begin with, but then there's a recollection that it's meaningless and not impactful, then it drops away.
3) How does it feel to see this?
What is the difference from before you started this dialogue? Please report from the past few days.
Before this dialogue, there was a period of 2 years of noticing the nature of thought and questioning. There seemed to be progressively less of a vested interest in the content of thought, as identities that came up were dismissed as not true. But still, when an I thought arose, it still 'felt like me' - there was still an identification, something not clearly seen.
When thought is felt to be 'me', it's a totally different perspective from when it's just random thought, being generated for a story line without any 'me' around to make it special. Then the thought seems very different, impersonal. Before that the thoughts are always prioritised because it is 'your own' and it is thought that there is something to be gained personally.
But when there is seen to be no person outside, all just experiencing without an inside and outside, gain doesn't make sense.
In this way, the interest in thoughts is beginning to slow.There are lots of habits and automatic reactions in place, but there's no such thing as a 'me' to be protected, or a 'me' to find something out, and it's already very freeing.
4) What was the last bit that pushed you over; made you look?
Thoughts arose claiming that there was an 'experiencer' observing these arisings, and was assumed to exist as a separate observer, despite having never been found anywhere. One of Vivien's many poignant questions was something like 'Who says there's an experiencer?' And I think that was it - it was the same voice-thought-arising again just making another claim for identity, just like the others - nothing special. The whole 'I am the observer' identity wasn't different or more powerful than any of the others - just a few words arising, making a claim, in exactly the same way as all the previous identities: as a simple arising. And this claim was right there 'inside' or a part of experience, as were all the others - so it was seen that 'inside' and 'outside' and 'separate' are not in existence.
5) a) Describe decision, intention, free will, choice and control. What makes things happen? How does it work?
Give examples from your own recent experiences to how things happen and how things work.
The meaning of all 5 words depend on there being a 'separate self' in existence.
The 'feeling' of being in control, choice and making a decision is nothing other than a thought saying so. The impression is that there are a series of thoughts, conjured up by 'I', each thought aware of the other thoughts and impacted by the previous ones - then the end product is the decision that 'I' made. But what is experienced? The thought comes from nowhere, definitely not chosen. And where is the proof of cause and effect? All there is is the current thought content making a statement now, freshly - the previous thought is nowhere to be found. There is never any actual decision- making, even when there's apparent indecision and reference to memory eg 'Do I want tea or do I want coffee today?'.'Well yesterday I had tea. I think I like tea better at the moment....yes, I'll have tea.' All that has been experienced is arising thoughts, each with their own content: some claiming to be past, yet all happening in the present; all claiming to belong to a self, which is unfindable. If the image of the body arises to substantiate the impression that that there is a solid 'I, this image is also just another arising.
There cannot be any such thing as free will if there is no separate, cut-off part of experience for the quality of free will to belong to. Free will is an idea, as are the other 4 words, an idea that can only exist in a story where existence is cut off into parts so that they can interact with the other parts.
b)
What are you responsible for? Give examples from your own recent experiences to how this works.
This 'I' has a job and a family. The 'I' may well continue to be responsible in the way that the story has gone so far, because I is a whole lot of intricate thoughts patterns which tend to keep coming up in a similar vein to the previous. But there is no saying what happens in a storyline: since there is no separate self, there is nothing to decide to be responsible or not responsible, so it's just whatever's happening happens.
This story has always had this character in it that looks after family members, children at school etc. This could be said to be responsible. But where's the doing of that? Where's the part where a decision is made other than thought content? Independently arising thought content say so, the thought patterns tell a story of responsibility - but if there's nobody owning those thought patterns, if they just arise effortlessly, then where's the effort? No doing can be found.
6) Anything to add?
Nothing else thank you 😊
