Giving this a try

[Sender]

Well, it can't be known, right? There is some taking in but is it Sender?
Again a sentences with 'sense' in it. In this case it is a thought again aka a belief. There is the belief that there is a head, a body, a mind.
If you close your eyes and look for the three, what do you find?

The taking in is not me. There is a single sensation which can be segmented into 'head/eyes/hands' etc. This sensation is somehow floating in space. This is another thought.

What is this factory supposed to be?

Just a thought.

[QUOTEThere is a sensation labeled intensity and given a place.
Is this sensation intensity or is it just a description?
Can it be known in the direct experience that there eyebrows?[/quote]

It is a description. No, eyebrows are imagined.

When you back to Senders body. If you close your eyes what is there in the direct experience?
Can a tag be found saying Sender?

There is no tag.

[Jadzia]

The taking in is not me. There is a single sensation which can be segmented into 'head/eyes/hands' etc. This sensation is somehow floating in space. This is another thought.

Beautiful, you get the looking and differing between what really is there and what is added by thought.
Thoughts are busy creatures, aren't they?

Eyebrows or Augenbraue, or sourcil, are added, yes, there are thoughts aka memories.
In the direct experience it can be colour form - looking into a mirror, or a physical sensation - touching one, or imagining them.
There is no tag to the body, it isn't labeled, right.
In DE (direct experience) body is smell, taste, sensation, colour/form and sound, right? Plus tons of thoughts adding it all up/putting it together and voila: Body! And because it is fun: Senders body!

Just to top it here is a little exercise.
You can do it sitting or lying down.
Place yourself, get comfy and close your eyes. Thoughts will rattle on, that is fine, they have their job to do, just don't heed them too much.
Now switch to what you find in your direct experience right now.
There might be a smell, noises and lots of sensations. Enjoy to see how speedy thoughts throw out what is what.
Now focus on the sensations, just on them.
Notice how some stick and some are coming and going.
Now check:
Thougths tell there is a body, fine.
But with eyes closed and dumping what thoughts 'tell' for a moment and just stick to what you can experience:
Any idea how tall the body is?
Can you be sure that there are toes, and how many?
Can you be sure that there is an inside or outside of something? Are there boundaries?
Can you be sure that there is a body?

Love,
Jadzia

[Sender]

There has been an opening since yesterday. What is behind thoughts is felt and abiding there can last. 'No effort' is better understood/experienced.

Any idea how tall the body is?
Can you be sure that there are toes, and how many?
Can you be sure that there is an inside or outside of something? Are there boundaries?
Can you be sure that there is a body?

The answer to these questions is no. Maybe more time should be spend on them as the feeling that this can sink deeper exists.

[Jadzia]

There has been an opening since yesterday. What is behind thoughts is felt and abiding there can last. 'No effort' is better understood/experienced.

Good.
Remember there is nothing not This/What is!
The story is what is, the seeing it is a story is what is, the feeling expansion is what is, to fall back into the story is what is ,thoughts are what is and so on. There is simply nothing wrong with anything. All is well.
And there is no effort, yes, beautiful you can see it.

Do you know 3D pictures, the ones where you might see lots of cats and when you relax your eyes suddenly the pic is 3D an you see a mouse.
Have a look here and go to the stereograms:
http://brainden.com/3d-pictures.htm
With a bit of practise you can shift between the obvious picture to the 'hidden' one.
Can you see that both pictures are there at the same time, and it is both pictures that make the stereogram?
What about the carefully woven story about Sender and that what it covers up a bit?

The answer to these questions is no. Maybe more time should be spend on them as the feeling that this can sink deeper exists.

It is a good idea to ask the questions again and again, while drinking tea, doing the dishes, walking.

Love,
Jadzia

[Sender]

Remember there is nothing not This/What is!
The story is what is, the seeing it is a story is what is, the feeling expansion is what is, to fall back into the story is what is ,thoughts are what is and so on. There is simply nothing wrong with anything. All is well.

Nice to have these spelled out. A feeling of 'loss' becomes more prominent as what-is-ness is understood.

Can you see that both pictures are there at the same time, and it is both pictures that make the stereogram?

I followed the suggestion and touched the screen with my face but was only able to see the separate images when I gave myself permission to become 'cross-eyed',or -better said- 'cross-minded' or 'one-minded', because I don't think this movement shows up as physical cross-eyedness. It is similar though because a merging takes place (in my case, 'behind the eyes'). I had this movement associated with entering in a no-go space. This time it 'paid off' because the images showed up.

What about the carefully woven story about Sender and that what it covers up a bit?

Can you give me more hints on this? I also want to see. Getting closer to it as no thoughts are touched. I think the story about Sender wants to create the impression of a 'balancer', of someone who aims for win-win situations and perpetually tries to figure out how these manifest through time, even within situations that do not appear to be win-win at first glance. An impression is just an impression though. 'Nothing comes out of nothing'.

[Jadzia]

A feeling of 'loss' becomes more prominent as what-is-ness is understood.

Look into this: What is feared to be lost?

The story of Sender, ok, lets have a look.
If you at any given time observe thoughts you will get descriptions of what Sender is like, what S dreams of, how S does things and what S does (lots of commentary...), what is S, what others might think about S, what belongs to S and so on. There is a whole bunch of information about the character S.
If you look in your direct experience for Sender, can you come up with an entity called Sender or can you only come up with a lot of thoughts about Sender?

Love,
Jadzia

[Sender]

Look into this: What is feared to be lost?

The familiarity of believing thoughts, stuckness, distance, my high horse, people not being invulnerable/concrete. These are thoughts.

Your suggestion to look lightly is helpful too.

I made the resolution to not drink coffee during this time but it didn't happen. Now there is the thought 'I am not in charge'.

A few more thoughts: There is a feeling of heaviness tonight. 'Mind squeezing' happened once again in order to write something 'good' for an assignment. Seems that it didn't work.

If you look in your direct experience for Sender, can you come up with an entity called Sender or can you only come up with a lot of thoughts about Sender?

Just thoughts. There is the thought that I am not ready for deep looking.

[Jadzia]

Look into this: What is feared to be lost?
The familiarity of believing thoughts, stuckness, distance, my high horse, people not being invulnerable/concrete. These are thoughts.

These are all thoughts but they are fears the character has and as such they have to be dealt with.
Mostly life goes on as it did after Gating, why should anything change? Sender can only be found in the elaborate story thoughts weave, S never has been the controler of life, the decider, the doer, the thinker.... see, only because there is a belief doesn't change anything. The belief in earth being flat doesn't change the true form of our planet. ;-)

Just thoughts.

So if you use direct looking the only place you can find Sender is in thoughts, right?
Not in the body, not in the headspace, not in the cupboard, or is there still an idea around where Sender the entity might be found?

There is the thought that I am not ready for deep looking.

Well in the story there are a lot of descriptions of the character Sender. Some description are nice and some are belittling, some are maybe even mean.
What happens with the descriptions if there is no entity calles Sender? If that what you are isn't Sender?

Love
Jadzia

[Sender]

So if you use direct looking the only place you can find Sender is in thoughts, right?

Yes

Not in the body, not in the headspace, not in the cupboard, or is there still an idea around where Sender the entity might be found?

There are sensations that are thought to be consistent and there is no proof that they are a 'me'. A proof would be a thought.

What happens with the descriptions if there is no entity calles Sender? If that what you are isn't Sender?

If I am not a Sender then descriptions do not 'land'. They do not come 'my' way. Noone is here to turn them away anyway. It is not like they are looking for shelter though. Maybe they have a blast floating around.

[Jadzia]

Maybe they have a blast floating around.

I am pretty sure they do... ;-)

Now there is the thought 'I am not in charge'.

Yesterday you wrote this.
Ok there is a thought telling this, never forget thoughts will always be included and epiphanies come this way too.
Did you go and investigate?
Of what is Sender not in charge?
Is Sender in charge of anything?

To help you a bit, today observe everything around decisions. Are decisions made or do they simply happen?
When do thoughts like " I decided this" before, during or after the action?
Do thoughts initiate action or do they only claim being the initiator?

Lift one hand, right now?
Did you know beforehand which hand would be lifted?
Any idea why this hand was chosen?
Did you, Sender lift the hand or did it just happen?

Have a close yet playful look.

Love,
Jadzia

[Sender]

There is less 'riding out' thoughts. There is the thought that if I take some days off, my replies here will be less 'cooked'/more spontaneous. There is (still) a slight headache/tension when a reply is written, as though it has to perfectly describe what is going on, but there is also an excitement to see what may come out if these perfectionistic thoughts are not messed with. There is the thought that it's funny 'I' still perceive thoughts as little entities that sort of have their own Maslow hierarchy of needs =)

Did you go and investigate?

No investigation was done on the spot

Of what is Sender not in charge?
Is Sender in charge of anything?

Still no clear answer on these. Right now, there seems to be a preference for 'letting go' of thoughts over what could be called 'deep looking'. Hopefully this is not too disappointing. There is the thought that deep looking should be prioritized if 'I' am serious about this.

To help you a bit, today observe everything around decisions. Are decisions made or do they simply happen?

They do simply happen even though it is tempting to say that someone 'did' something e.g. 'I' felt cold so 'I' got up and turned on the heater. What happened looks more like, (thought about) feeling cold, upward movement to leave chair, walk towards heater, turn button.

When do thoughts like " I decided this" before, during or after the action?

Such thought is not found. Maybe a headache coupled with a period of uncertainty (which is just going from one thought to another) and other 'annoying' sensations can be seen as a 'time when a decision is prepared and eventually made', but there is no clear boundary between the phases.

Do thoughts initiate action or do they only claim being the initiator?

yes these little ones only claim it with their little non-voices ! Not that size matters in this case.

Lift one hand, right now?
Did you know beforehand which hand would be lifted?

No such claim can be made

Any idea why this hand was chosen?

There is the thought that the right hand was lifted because the other hand was covered so it would be harder to lift, but this cannot be proven.

Did you, Sender lift the hand or did it just happen?

This feels the trickiest.. There is the temptation to go into thinking.

[Jadzia]

There is less 'riding out' thoughts. There is the thought that if I take some days off, my replies here will be less 'cooked'/more spontaneous. There is (still) a slight headache/tension when a reply is written, as though it has to perfectly describe what is going on, but there is also an excitement to see what may come out if these perfectionistic thoughts are not messed with. There is the thought that it's funny 'I' still perceive thoughts as little entities that sort of have their own Maslow hierarchy of needs =)

Could you still write normally? Go back to normal.
We are noun friendly here. You can write from first person, I, me, mine.

Of what is Sender not in charge?
Is Sender in charge of anything?
Still no clear answer on these. Right now, there seems to be a preference for 'letting go' of thoughts over what could be called 'deep looking'. Hopefully this is not too disappointing. There is the thought that deep looking should be prioritized if 'I' am serious about this.

This doesn't answer the questions. Go look!
There is no need to let thoughts go!!! Not at all. It is about observing thoughts and realizing how the story of Sender is built and what can be observed and what not. Thoughts are nothing bad or whatever, they just are!

They do simply happen even though it is tempting to say that someone 'did' something e.g. 'I' felt cold so 'I' got up and turned on the heater.

Who or what is tempted?

What happened looks more like, (thought about) feeling cold, upward movement to leave chair, walk towards heater, turn button.

Do you have any proof that the thought started the sequence?

When do thoughts like " I decided this" before, during or after the action?
Such thought is not found. Maybe a headache coupled with a period of uncertainty (which is just going from one thought to another) and other 'annoying' sensations can be seen as a 'time when a decision is prepared and eventually made', but there is no clear boundary between the phases.

Is there never a thought claiming to be the initiator of the action?
Watch over the day.

Any idea why this hand was chosen?
There is the thought that the right hand was lifted because the other hand was covered so it would be harder to lift, but this cannot be proven.

Good.
For a thought to initiate action it would need power.
Do thoughts have any power? I know there are meter worth of books telling so, but is it true?

Did you, Sender lift the hand or did it just happen?
This feels the trickiest.. There is the temptation to go into thinking.

Lets make it a bit easier.
Think "Lift hand". Does the hand lift or not?
Does it always lift when the thought comes?

Another thing we are not eradicating the self here, this is strep one on the path, right now it is important to see that the self isn't what it was thought it is. Sender is happening in a story, why should that stop?

Love,
Jadzia

[Sender]

Who or what is tempted?

Noone and nothing. There is a habit for disclosing content of thought. Noone has that habit. An endeavour to check out why and how the disclosure happens can be apparently paired up with 'unwelcome' emotions and sensations. This seems to be a different kind of work though.

Do you have any proof that the thought started the sequence?

No proof that the thought of the sensation or the sensation (both are the same thing in a way) started the sequence. I feel like toying with the notion of sequence e.g. coming up with scenarios and checking the effect they have, but that would be me trying to get this intellectually. It reminds me of Goran Backlund's writings about having no proof that life rolls out from past to future and not the other way around, but he wrote that after he supposedly awakened.

Is there never a thought claiming to be the initiator of the action?
Watch over the day.

No thought about initiating. There can be lack of vigilance and the 'watching' can turn into 'thinking'/entering content. I might be starting to get a better idea of what this watching is.

Do thoughts have any power? I know there are meter worth of books telling so, but is it true?

It cannot be proven that thoughts have any power. It can not be proven that they can affect or create an outcome. Making associations is something that happens (to nobody and for nobody). I am writing this in a (nicely) dispassionate way and there is/was the expectation that certainty would feel different.

Think "Lift hand". Does the hand lift or not?
Does it always lift when the thought comes?

It does not lift. The justification that appears is that it did not lift because you wrote "think "lift hand"" instead of "lift hand", but in any case there is no proof that the thought causes the lifting. I have read about how people describe this in terms of there being a delay between the thought and the manifestation, but this does not resonate. Even if I could literally see a thing called thought doing something in front of 'me', it does not prove something.

Sender is happening in a story, why should that stop?

I don't know. There are feelings about Sender right now. Mostly what one could call compassion or pity. Sender is seen as a vehicle to understand and end suffering, and that makes me feel bad for wanting to 'use' her in that way. Again, however, this seems to be a different kind of work.

[Sender]

Sender is happening in a story, why should that stop?

I don't know. There are feelings about Sender right now. Mostly what one could call compassion or pity. Sender is seen as a vehicle to understand and end suffering, and that makes me feel bad for wanting to 'use' her in that way. Again, however, this seems to be a different kind of work.

I went over what I wrote and this is what came up:

'There are feelings about Sender right now'----> these 'feelings about Sender' are a sensation.

[Sender]

My understanding of 'watching' is that it means staying with the sensation. Not lingering on it or try to understand it. Just letting it unroll. If I try to see where the sensation starts and where it ends I go into visualisation/interpretation.