The awakening of M

[lex]

Hi Malika,

What comes to mind with I - me,self, ego,identity,personality,pride,thoughts, smallness, separation,definition,boundaries, want,claiming,owning

What comes to mind with awareness - knowing, vast like an ocean, timeless, now, presence, black panther, love,experience, endless,alive,peace, silence,bliss, seeing, expansion,freedom, breath

Ok, my mistake, I invited the mind (what comes to mind) to produce associations. Anyway it shows that "I am awareness" is obviously not true. The two are clearly totally different.

The first option seems like a conscious choice,so it is active.

But is it?

The second option seems passive like one is just watching the thought pass, till it disappears.

So just another point of view, another thought about the appearance of a thought: "Conscious choice" or "by itself".
So apart from the point of view, is there an essential difference in the mechanism? Is "I chose to stop" really different from "it stopped by itself", or are these thoughts afterwards about what happened and what happened was just what happened?



We do an experiment:
Put your hand (the one that is on the arm that isn't broken) in front of you on a table.
Hand flat on the table.
Now lift one finger.
What made that finger go up and not another?
Now wait until another or the same finger is lifted.
Look who or what decided when the finger lifted and which finger was lifted.
Repeat until it is clear.
Report.


Greetz to Willem,

Lex

[Malikaocean]

Hi Lex,

Ok, my mistake, I invited the mind (what comes to mind) to produce associations. Anyway it shows that "I am awareness" is obviously not true. The two are clearly totally different

.
Yes, I agree, I noticed too how different the words I used were...it kind of showed the I isn't real, in a clear way. But maybe I am having this understanding in my in the mind.
So, I feel that exercise did help me to understand I is not awareness..does appear in it though.

"The first option seems like a conscious choice,so it is active."
But is it?

If there is only awareness then it just seems like a conscious choice ,it just happens and I notice. I then thinks it chose this action. In this case I am a total non-doer and everything just happens. Awareness witnessing awareness.

Thought as direct experience, could be more expanded by the things we learn , or teach the mind, or insights we have...so maybe in this case lets say awareness has more tools in the box so it can pick out of more options. And then the I says it chose. And of course now I notice that then the I thinks - "well I am the one that learned and taught these tools"...wanting to keep it's importance. Wanting to maintain itself. ( and it look a bit absurd)
I do notice a struggle to really accept I am a non doer...and maybe it isn't acceptance but seeing...
And I notice an irritation or a bit of an anger from that I...maybe as it was exposed...

So just another point of view, another thought about the appearance of a thought: "Conscious choice" or "by itself".
So apart from the point of view, is there an essential difference in the mechanism? Is "I chose to stop" really different from "it stopped by itself", or are these thoughts afterwards about what happened and what happened was just what happened?

These are just thoughts afterwards about what happened. Thoughts of an I. I got it ! (well...something got it)

We do an experiment:
Put your hand (the one that is on the arm that isn't broken) in front of you on a table.
Hand flat on the table.
Now lift one finger.
What made that finger go up and not another?
Now wait until another or the same finger is lifted.
Look who or what decided when the finger lifted and which finger was lifted.
Repeat until it is clear.
Report.

I did notice that a finger lifted , I didn't chose that particular one..I tried to find what made that finger go up and it seems like I say or think - lift a finger and it happens ( so a thought). Like I give a command. I don't know what made that particular finger go up...(possibly an unconscious thought)
If I say lift the thumb up...the thumb lifts up.
waiting for another or same finger to be lifted -nothing happens..no fingers get lifted.

I repeated quite a few times..but i might be missing the point

Greetz to Willem

I shall pass in person when I see him, for now - Willem, greetz from Lex
Thank you , Malika

[Malikaocean]

Hi Lex,

Ik dacht ik deel nog iets wat mij opviel, dat toen ik weer dat artikel las over DE (eergisteren), ik het ineens anders las. Alsof er wat anders stond wat ik eerst niet zag. Een soort van meer duidelijk.

Geniet van de zon, Malika

[lex]

Hoi Malika, oceaan in een druppel,

Een soort van meer duidelijk.

Het is ineens duidelijk dat we verder kunnen in het Nederlands, hoewel het voordeel van Engels is, dat er eventueel meer gidsen mee kunnen kijken. Maar misschien biedt Nederlands een ander perspectief en dat is waar het allemaal om gaat: Een ander perspectief.

Een soort van meer duidelijk.

Beetje vaag. Kun je aangeven wat er veranderd is? Wat je nu anders ziet? Wat duidelijker is geworden?

waiting for another or same finger to be lifted -nothing happens..no fingers get lifted

Het is wel de bedoeling dat je de intentie hebt om een vinger omhoog te doen. En dan te kijken wanneer dat gebeurt en welke vinger en vooral kijken wat het veroorzaakt. Doe de oefening nog eens.

it seems like I say or think - lift a finger and it happens

It seems, maar is het zo? Is het de gedachte die dat veroorzaakt of gaat de gedachte gepaard met de handeling? Is er altijd een gedachte of komt de handeling soms spontaan "uit het niets". Als er een gedachte is, verschijnt die voor, na of tijdens de handeling?

I is not awareness

Ik is of ik ben niet bewustzijn? Wees eerlijk.

I is not awareness..does appear in it though.

It appears, I appear. So the mind constructs "something" it appears in and calls that awareness.

If there is only awareness then it just seems like a conscious choice ,it just happens and I notice.

Only if there is only awareness? Is that a necessary condition, or preposition? Waarom die voorwaarde? Is er ooit iemand die een keuze maakt of gebeurt de keuze altijd spontaan? Al dan niet gevolgd door een ik-gedachte.

awareness has more tools in the box

awareness really is a living, acting entity to you, isn't it?

And I notice an irritation

Interesting. Weet je waarvoor? Waarover? Waarom?

These are just thoughts afterwards about what happened. Thoughts of an I. I got it ! (well...something got it)

Mooi zo. Je kan gerust zeggen "I got it". Het woord/concept "Ik" is hartstikke handig in het sociale verkeer. Ik ben nu bijvoorbeeld voor jou de andere kant van deze conversatie. Jij voor mij andersom. Net als de andere oever in dit befaamde lied van Drs. P.


Het punt is dat "ik" als er geen ander in de buurt is een eigen leven is gaan leiden. Ik praat tegen mezelf, ik heb ideeën over mezelf, meestal geen erg vriendelijke, of erger: spirituele (zoals: "ik ben bewustzijn") Voor je het weet heb je een "hoger Zelf" (met een hoofdletter, uiteraard om de Goddelijkheid daarvan te benadrukken) en een lager zelf, dat niet deugt en eigenlijk weg moet, of liever nog: getransformeerd of getranscendeerd.


Even terugkomend op het verhaal "Direct experience":
Heb je nu door wat bedoeld wordt met "an unmistakable sense of Aliveness"? Het duidelijke, onmiskenbare, levendige gevoel te bestaan? De vrijwel onontkoombare neiging is om daar onmiddellijk een ik op te plakken: Ik leef. Ik besta. Ik ben. Dat is de wortel van het ego. Voor je het weet [sic] plakken daar dan weer allerlei eigenschappen en ideeën aan.
Kun je dat zien? Mediteer daar eens op. Neem "ik ben", "ik leef" of "ik besta" eens als mantra en kijk hoe dat voelt voorbij de woorden.


Ik zie dat het vrij veel "huiswerk" is. Het is belangrijker dat je het grondig "doet" dan snel. Neem je tijd. Je hoeft niet morgen meteen met alle antwoorden of resultaten te komen.

[Malikaocean]

Hi Lex,

Een soort van meer duidelijk.

Het is ineens duidelijk dat we verder kunnen in het Nederlands, hoewel het voordeel van Engels is, dat er eventueel meer gidsen mee kunnen kijken. Maar misschien biedt Nederlands een ander perspectief en dat is waar het allemaal om gaat: Een ander perspectief.

haha...ik had nog geen eens door dat ik in nederlands schreef...
Ik schreef in Engels omdat ik toen ik 24 was ging reizen en heb daarna 20 jaar In Engeland heb gewoond...hence is mijn Engels veel beter dan mijn Nederlands. Heb eigenlijk bijna alleen Engels gesproken.
Ik vind het makkelijker om in Engels door te gaan maar als je denkt het beter in Nederlands is, zal ik mijn best doen ( maar vergeef mijn fouten...)

oceaan in een druppel

mooi gezegd, dat hou ik mischien wel als een naam of mantra

Beetje vaag. Kun je aangeven wat er veranderd is? Wat je nu anders ziet? Wat duidelijker is geworden?

Het was een ervaring dat ik het las en duidelijk zag wat er stond, terwijl ik het eerst een paar keer las maar het was alsof ik de woorden niet opnam. Net of er een soort mist tussen zat, tussen the woorden en mijn hoofd. Nu zie ik duidelijk dat ik al lang aware ben van presence. Ik dacht ook dat ik presence was... Het is wel iets waar ik vaker en vaker bewust van ben. De senses ook en hoe ik die ervaar in presence als een soort ripple effect... .
Het is nu duidelijk dat ik in de gedachten constant denk dat er een ik is. En daar het meest in vast zit zeg maar.
Het is duidelijker wat dit process is en ik voel me meer open zou ik zeggen. ( minder stubborn in Engels )
Vandaag merkte ik in het zwembad dat als ik even niet dacht..en gewoon het water voelde en de zon..het een veel fijnere ervaring was dan met de gedachten erbij. ( ik snap natuurlijk wel dat gedachten blijven, maar er is minder negatief commentaar)

Het is wel de bedoeling dat je de intentie hebt om een vinger omhoog te doen. En dan te kijken wanneer dat gebeurt en welke vinger en vooral kijken wat het veroorzaakt. Doe de oefening nog eens.

Met de intentie, gaat er een vinger omhoog. De gedachte over de vinger komt na dat de vinger omhoog ging. Er is een ervaring ervan, een gevoel van vinger gaat omhoog.

It seems, maar is het zo? Is het de gedachte die dat veroorzaakt of gaat de gedachte gepaard met de handeling? Is er altijd een gedachte of komt de handeling soms spontaan "uit het niets". Als er een gedachte is, verschijnt die voor, na of tijdens de handeling?

Als ik de intentie zet om een vinger omhoog te doen gebeurt dat. Het is niet de gedachte die het veroorzaakt want ik kan ook denken -vinger omhoog, vinger omhoog en dan gebeurt er niks..want er is geen will of intentie, alleen een losse gedachte.
En er gebeuren vaak dingen uit het niets, zoals ik draai me hoofd even...maar dacht dat niet eerst. Het gebeurde en ik zag het, en toen dacht ik het.

I is not awareness

Ik is of ik ben niet bewustzijn? Wees eerlijk.

Ik weet niet zeker dat ik dit begrijp in Nederlands...bedoel je- ik is niet bewustzijn? en tweede vraag - ik ben niet bewustzijn ?

Ik is niet bewustzijn - het lijkt mij dat alles in bewustzijn is..maar dat het ik als een alleenstaand deel niet bewustzijn is, nee. Meer dat het lijkt in gedachten te bestaan maar als je dat ik zoekt vindt je het niet. Toch kan je het ervaren alsof het echt is door gedachten en emoties die volgen. (identification)

Ik ben niet bewustzijn - ik ben wel bewustzijn...maar daar bedoel ik niet de 'valse ik' , maar I AM.

If there is only awareness then it just seems like a conscious choice ,it just happens and I notice.

Only if there is only awareness? Is that a necessary condition, or preposition? Waarom die voorwaarde? Is er ooit iemand die een keuze maakt of gebeurt de keuze altijd spontaan? Al dan niet gevolgd door een ik-gedachte.

Well, if there was something else but awareness , that something might be able to make a choice...but as there isn't, it looks like it is how it is ( there is only awareness). Not a necessary condition, just is.

And the question if there was anyone who ever chose or does it all happen spontaneously ?
I think it does al happen by itself and a thought follows...I just notice that I don't totally believe it..Well the I doesn't anyway...and if I did believe it I thinks it would be powerless.
As you see there is a gap here...
I do feel that as a human being there is a choice as to how to respond to what is. But who choses that response, possibly the response also just arises if there were no filters.

awareness has more tools in the box

awareness really is a living, acting entity to you, isn't it?[/quote

Not sure I think it is an entity but rather god/source/energy/love that does expand/contract through experience and only can know itself through experience.
So the more experience the more it knows itself.
It is certainly aliveness and feels like the source of everything.

I mean with tools in the box that the experience I have in the body Malika expands too with the right experiences/ teachings/ knowledge/insights voor awareness to have a full Malika experience( these are the tools) . Malika being a filter through which awareness experiences itself.
In my reality this means if I go with the flow, basically just do/see/experience what arises without trying to stop/control/slow it/ ect...with the I that thinks it is separate and wants to decide if what arises is ok or not...I am just experience.

And I notice an irritation

Interesting. Weet je waarvoor? Waarover? Waarom?

Yes, an irritation from the I that is being challenged to see it doesn't exist...it pushes to drop this exercise and stop this process so it can resume control.

Het punt is dat "ik" als er geen ander in de buurt is een eigen leven is gaan leiden. Ik praat tegen mezelf, ik heb ideeën over mezelf, meestal geen erg vriendelijke, of erger: spirituele (zoals: "ik ben bewustzijn") Voor je het weet heb je een "hoger Zelf" (met een hoofdletter, uiteraard om de Goddelijkheid daarvan te benadrukken) en een lager zelf, dat niet deugt en eigenlijk weg moet, of liever nog: getransformeerd of getranscendeerd.

oh jee...dan kan ik stoppen met les geven...haha...maar ik weet wat je bedoelt , ik noemde het ook higher self eerst..maar nu source. En lager zelf, noem ik nu shadow, alleen omdat het een deel is wat je niet ziet ( beliefs, conditioning , ect...things that cloud clear seeing) ik geloof niet dat die shadow weg moet maar het helpt wel om er wat licht ( helderheid) op te schijnen zodat je bijv. ziet dat je alles bent..niet alleen delen die je wil of niet wil...

( bekend voorbeeld , priesters die kinderen molesteren omdat ze hun sexuele natuur zien als iets ongewenst...dan komt het uit in een getwiste vorm...shadow.)= denial of self as being everything (god) with all aspects.

Door dit process wat wij hier doen wordt mijn werk ook weer helder.
Ik weet niet of ik denk dat spirituele ideen nog erger zijn dan onvriendelijke gedachten over mezelf.

Heb je nu door wat bedoeld wordt met "an unmistakable sense of Aliveness"? Het duidelijke, onmiskenbare, levendige gevoel te bestaan?

Ja, dat begrijp ik en weet dat ik deze ervaar. Het gekke lijkt dat ik maar zoek en zoek in woorden maar het al lang ervaren heb...

Voor je het weet [sic] plakken daar dan weer allerlei eigenschappen en ideeën aan.
Kun je dat zien?

ja, dat kan ik zien.

Mediteer daar eens op. Neem "ik ben", "ik leef" of "ik besta" eens als mantra en kijk hoe dat voelt voorbij de woorden.

I am (Ik ben )- met deze mantra ervaar ik dat er een center is wat stil is in alles wat beweegt..daar altijd is in oneindige stilte, space en vrede.
I am alive ( ik leef)- met deze ervaar ik dat ik leef in alles.
I exist (ik besta) -mmmm...hier wordt mijn hoofd weer over actieve van...ik voel wel iets van stilte. zoiets als - I exist in exsistance...
Nou dat was een 'ride' , dank je , Malika

[lex]

Hi Malika,

hence is mijn Engels veel beter dan mijn Nederlands.

Ok, English it is.

Het is nu duidelijk dat ik in de gedachten constant denk dat er een ik is. En daar het meest in vast zit zeg maar.

(of zeg maar niet). Dus je denkt dat je daarin vastzit? Is it true? Do you believe that thought?
Also you seem to distinguish between "I" and "an I". Isn't that a trick of the ego a.k.a. the mind?

En er gebeuren vaak dingen uit het niets, zoals ik draai me hoofd even...maar dacht dat niet eerst. Het gebeurde en ik zag het, en toen dacht ik het.

So something happens followed by an I-thought. "I" claiming an action for something that just occurred. Is there ever a central entity "I" that makes something happen, or is it always a mere thought afterwards? How would that be with animals or very young children?

I is not awareness

Ik is of ik ben niet bewustzijn? Wees eerlijk.

Ik weet niet zeker dat ik dit begrijp in Nederlands...bedoel je- ik is niet bewustzijn? en tweede vraag - ik ben niet bewustzijn ?

Why don't you say: "I am not awareness"? Why use "is"?

.maar daar bedoel ik niet de 'valse ik' , maar I AM.

Is "I AM" not false?

Well, if there was something else but awareness , that something might be able to make a choice...but as there isn't, it looks like it is how it is ( there is only awareness). Not a necessary condition, just is.

And the question if there was anyone who ever chose or does it all happen spontaneously ?
I think it does al happen by itself and a thought follows...I just notice that I don't totally believe it..Well the I doesn't anyway...and if I did believe it I thinks it would be powerless.
As you see there is a gap here...
I do feel that as a human being there is a choice as to how to respond to what is. But who choses that response, possibly the response also just arises if there were no filters.
awareness has more tools in the box

awareness really is a living, acting entity to you, isn't it?

Not sure I think it is an entity but rather god/source/energy/love that does expand/contract through experience and only can know itself through experience.
So the more experience the more it knows itself.
It is certainly aliveness and feels like the source of everything.

I mean with tools in the box that the experience I have in the body Malika expands too with the right experiences/ teachings/ knowledge/insights voor awareness to have a full Malika experience( these are the tools) . Malika being a filter through which awareness experiences itself.
In my reality this means if I go with the flow, basically just do/see/experience what arises without trying to stop/control/slow it/ ect...with the I that thinks it is separate and wants to decide if what arises is ok or not...I am just experience.

We had the appointment that we didn't go into philosophies and discard all "we know" and all "wisdom" we picked up in our spiritual journey. Please just look with honest curiosity and a fresh unbiased attitude. Like a child, so you wish.

I am (Ik ben )- met deze mantra ervaar ik dat er een center is wat stil is in alles wat beweegt..daar altijd is in oneindige stilte, space en vrede.

Observe this "I am" carefully. Is there a difference between "I am" and "just being"?
I other words, is there really "I" in "I am"? Is there a center? If so, can you locate it?

[lex]

Suddenly I notice your subject:
"The awakening of M"
There will be no awakening for there is no M that can awaken.
How can a thought, an idea, a concept awaken?

[Malikaocean]

Hi Lex.

How can a thought, an idea, a concept awaken?

ok, it's gone ( the subject line) as a concept/thought/idea can't awaken.
It was merely a reminder for myself to awaken to reality.

(of zeg maar niet). Dus je denkt dat je daarin vastzit? Is it true? Do you believe that thought?
Also you seem to distinguish between "I" and "an I". Isn't that a trick of the ego a.k.a. the mind?

It isn't true...when I believe that thought I am stuck in in it (only then)
And yes that is totally a trick of the ego...I see that now you point to it.

So something happens followed by an I-thought. "I" claiming an action for something that just occurred. Is there ever a central entity "I" that makes something happen, or is it always a mere thought afterwards? How would that be with animals or very young children?

No there is no central entity "I" .
The young child would be in wonder, experiencing what is. Not a thought before it happens.
An animal would be experiencing through instinct or finely tuned senses what is. Not a thought before it happens.

But what is it then when I want to do something..let's say make a cup of tea. A will? a desire? an intent? as I also experience ( or think ) I can do something I want.

Why don't you say: "I am not awareness"? Why use "is"?

I used is as I meant the the imaginary I isn't awareness. I didn't mean - I am not awareness...but as I can't say I am awareness neither...I guess it's the same.

Is "I AM" not false?

With I AM , I meant awareness , so no it isn't false. Any other way I can say this ?

We had the appointment that we didn't go into philosophies and discard all "we know" and all "wisdom" we picked up in our spiritual journey. Please just look with honest curiosity and a fresh unbiased attitude. Like a child, so you wish.

ok...I can see that without the identity I , there is just experience.
and from a child's eye , yes awareness is alive but there is no separation from it.

Observe this "I am" carefully. Is there a difference between "I am" and "just being"?
I other words, is there really "I" in "I am"? Is there a center? If so, can you locate it?

No there is no I in "I am" , but hard to find other ways of saying what we are. To me it means being or presence. So, no there is no difference between "i am" and "just being".
And no there is no center just an ability to focus on what is experienced.

Thanks, Malika

[lex]

Hi Malika

It was merely a reminder for myself to awaken to reality.

So keep the reminder. To awaken to the reality that there is no awakening possible for Malika.

But what is it then when I want to do something..let's say make a cup of tea. A will? a desire?

Is there an essential difference between: "A desire arises" or "I want"? Or is it another way to express the same? The latter just more conventional? Where does that desire come from? Is there somewhere an entity (I) that creates desires? If so, where is it located?

... as I also experience ( or think ) I can do something I want.

Experience or think?
There is a desire which triggers an action. Any person involved? Or does that person appears after the desire/action as a mere thought? Look. And look in your daily life. What triggers your actions? Observe and report.

Ik ben niet bewustzijn - ik ben wel bewustzijn...maar daar bedoel ik niet de 'valse ik' , maar I AM.

Is "I AM" not false?
With I AM , I meant awareness , so no it isn't false. Any other way I can say this ?

Yes, like this:

No there is no I in "I am"
there is no difference between "i am" and "just being".

And no there is no center just an ability to focus on what is experienced.

Looks like it's seen.


Is there a separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', Malika, at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form? Was
there ever?

[Malikaocean]

Hi Lex,

So keep the reminder. To awaken to the reality that there is no awakening possible for Malika.

Yes, I get that now.

Is there an essential difference between: "A desire arises" or "I want"? Or is it another way to express the same? The latter just more conventional? Where does that desire come from? Is there somewhere an entity (I) that creates desires? If so, where is it located?

A desire arises out of nothingness has no emotion or thought attached to it yet...a want feels like a thought that I identify with. Both do happen in awareness.
And no there is no I that creates desire nor an entity..but an imaginary I might create a want.
( it could be that that I define desire as something else than you do, just as language thing? )

I did notice an experience this morning where I thought I was in presence, as if I stood in the middle of it and looked around me. I did go deeper into it and saw that before I claimed that there was an I in the middle, there was no I ,just a blissful feeling. I recognized that I have done that often before...

Experience or think?
There is a desire which triggers an action. Any person involved? Or does that person appears after the desire/action as a mere thought? Look. And look in your daily life. What triggers your actions? Observe and report.

There is no person involved in a desire that triggers action. A person appears after the desire through identifying with a thought about the desire or action. This person is a thought.
I notice in my daily life that just before an action there is a feeling of desire to do it. These can vary a bit like - if there is thirst , i get water, hungry - i get food. (physical needs)
Or with a sad feeling I might desire a hug...(emotional)
I notice to that there is doubt sometimes about an action as if 2 forces pull to chose one or the other. In my experience this doubt is in the mind about a desire that might have arisen and a thought about it.
What triggers the action is a desire...or a very strong identification with a thought.

Is there a separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', Malika, at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form? Was
there ever?

No..there isn't ,just an identification with thoughts that say that there is a Malika, and these thoughts seem real. When looking inside there isn't an I as an entity.

I think I actually feel a shift now.

Thanks, Malika

[lex]

Hi Malika,

there was no I ,just a blissful feeling

So you cracked the identification mechanism. Congratulations. I'm proud of you. You can have a glowing ego moment now.

I think I actually feel a shift now.

Are you sure? Or do you feel that you think? (you're not obliged to answer)


Some more questions to confirm that the shift has happened that can help to consolidate and deepen the insight:

Share in your own words what the illusion of a separate self is.
How did it come into existence?
How does it feel to see this?

What is the difference from before you started this dialogue? Please report from the past few days.
What was the last bit that pushed you over, made you look? was there a specific moment when seeing happened or was it gradual?

Do you decide, intend, choose, control events in Life? Do you make anything happen? Give examples from your experience.

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

virtual hug,

Lex

[lex]

There is no hurry.
The rule: "post every day" is voided.
Take your time.

[Malikaocean]

Hi Lex,

So you cracked the identification mechanism. Congratulations. I'm proud of you. You can have a glowing ego moment now.

Thank you ! I basked in it for a moment and felt happy. Also a bit surprised and I jokingly said - " ik ben geslaagd " ( at which W rolled his eyes...haha)

I think I actually feel a shift now.
Are you sure? Or do you feel that you think? (you're not obliged to answer)

I genuinely feel I do, a lighter/peaceful feeling came and I feel like things feel less personal.
It suddenly seemed clear what I already knew in my head ( a bit of a researcher I am ). These findings felt like they grounded and become more of a knowing. A knowing being something that stays once you've seen it.

Share in your own words what the illusion of a separate self is.
How did it come into existence?
How does it feel to see this?

The illusion of separate self is believing a cluster of thoughts we have collected to tell a story about who we think are. We collect more and more evidence to prove these thoughts are real. These thoughts create emotions that are then felt in the body , which again make the reality of the identity even stronger. It is actually quite stressful to maintain an identity...it takes a lot of energy. We defend it fiercely out of a fear of losing control over our life or experience...in reality this control actually cuts us of from real experience of the now.
The thoughts, emotions, beliefs , ect...seem to "shout" much louder than the silence within and we actually identify with them and become or live a life of an I.

It came to existence by staying attached to or identifying with a thought, a trauma, a belief imposed or passed on by our carers, a moment in time of pain we want to forget or fear to experience again or a moment pleasure we want to repeat. A will to be in charge of experience (control)...instead of allowing experience . A focus on the outside mainly and not on the inside. Thinking the outside is the source of what we think we need...instead of being in source where we have al we need.
I think a lot of it has to do with feeling safe and survival.

To see it feels a bit like freedom...because maybe I am a bit more free to see that what happens isn't personal , and I can stop thinking that what happens affects the I. Then I don't have to spend the energy on control or protection but can be more open in the moment to experience the now. I now feel I have more of a knowing that awareness isn't affected by any of it...it leaves no mark on it with whatever happens.
And that it isn't an I "looking through my eyes" but that it is the same "thing" that looks through all eyes and lives in all things.
It feels lighter and also empowering in a way. And true , just like you said , a small shift yet it changes the way we experience everything.

I shall answer the other questions soon too.
Thank you Lex for being my guide, it is deeply appreciated.
Kind regards, Malika

[lex]

[lex]

Everything ok?