Let's do this

[ashton]

LU is focused guiding for seeing there is no real, inherent 'self' - what do you understand by this?
That there are just sensations- physical, emotional, thought sensations, space, awareness, etc, all just sensations

What are you looking for at LU?
Attain stream entry- basically exactly what I said above, but actually experience it in my day to day reality, versus it just being some goal that I haven't attained to. Be able to recognize impermanence, no-self, unsatisfactoryness, and if the guidance gets me there, I'd feel comfortable doing the rest of the work (expanding the sensate idea into all aspects- having all sensations be known, and the knot completely untangled)

What do you expect from a guided conversation?
I expect guidance basically aiming to help untie the knot I mentioned above. Get me to look at my various sensate environment, and objectively identify with what is going on, versus get so lost by the content.

What is your experience in terms of spiritual practices, seeking and inquiry?
Shamatha and vipassana meditation/noting practice.

I've tried LU before but now, having done noting practice and having begun to untie the knot in terms of identifying certain sensations as sensations, I am much more confident and ready than before.

On a scale from 1 to 10, how willing are you to question any currently held beliefs about 'self? 11

[vinceschubert]

Hi Ash, Thanks for asking. i always get a little ego swell when some body asks me to guide them. i know that it's not me, but some resonance between what they read and what they feel, but still it feels good.

what do you understand by this?
That there are just sensations- physical, emotional, thought sensations, space, awareness, etc, all just sensations

How can you describe the content of thought stories as sensations?
Say that you are outside in nature and you feel a sensation of a light touch on the back of your neck. What happens?

vince

[ashton]

what do you understand by this?
That there are just sensations- physical, emotional, thought sensations, space, awareness, etc, all just sensations

For example, as I am typing this sentence, I experience a sensation of touch for every time I press a key, I experience a thought sensation (which would better be described as an "auditory thought") when I think of what to say, or even as Im writing. I also experience other things that are more in the background, or, not as in the forefront of my experience, like sense of sight, every time I see the screen change with the addition of each letter. I'll start with those since those are more obvious sensations (even though Im not always aware of them 24/7, mostly when Im actually "looking").

How can you describe the content of thought stories as sensations?

Thoughts of any type are sensations because it is something I directly experience. (Im not refuting you or anything when i say all of this- just talking about my own experience): To say that thought wouldnt be a sensation or a part of my experience would be absurd, it is something that simply just happens, just as anything else does.

For example, I may visibly see a car (visual sensation)
I can also imagine a car (still a thought), and both are very real in my sensate experience, no matter if it occurs "out there" or "in here".

Say that you are outside in nature and you feel a sensation of a light touch on the back of your neck. What happens?

(This is all thought content incoming, but I'll answer it as though it were happening):

I feel a light touch on my neck, and so that is a touch sensation. Next, I may have thought content of "what touched my neck", and then I may physically move to see, which could include physical sensation (of body movement), maybe some sound sensations, visual sensations (however unnoticed/unclear) of my field of view changing.

Also forgot to mention, there may even be an emotion sensation in there too, even if that is really actually just made up of other sensations like physical/thought sensations, but you get the gist.

P.S. Even though I saw all of this, my experiential reality does not go anywhere near as smoothly as I described the process, most goes unnoticed since im not always in a sort of hyper witnessing state lol,

Ashton

[ashton]

Hello?

[vinceschubert]

Hi Ashton,

as I am typing this sentence, I experience a sensation of touch for every time I press a key, I experience a thought sensation (which would better be described as an "auditory thought") when I think of what to say, or even as Im writing.

Ah, good stuff. It will take a little back and forth for us to synchronize our use of language.
i was (unthinkingly) using sensation to refer to touch sensation. Of course it does refer to any of the sense organs being stimulated. ..and i agree that thoughts invoke the same responses as other sensory input.

Im not refuting you or anything when i say all of this- just talking about my own experience

i love this. Feel free to refute if it is appropriate. Please do not accept anything that i say without confirming it in your own experience.

I may visibly see a car (visual sensation)
I can also imagine a car (still a thought), and both are very real in my sensate experience, no matter if it occurs "out there" or "in here".

yes. Now tell me if this resonates.. Even when you see something "out there", the brain predicts and projects.
That is when it has what it thinks is sufficient information, it completes a picture of what it thinks it is seeing and then relates to that picture, as if it were the actual 'object'.

I may have thought content of "what touched my neck"

This is the really significant bit.
Now, i put it to you that if you thought that it was a leaf or a fly, you might just brush it away, but if you thought that it might be something that would bite you, there would be a different reaction.
What i am getting at is the responses to anything and everything depends on the story that arises from the stimulus, be that physical or mental. Does this seem accurate to you?

most goes unnoticed since im not always in a sort of hyper witnessing state lol,

Yes, of course. There may be the itch that we scratch without being conscious of it.

vince

[ashton]

Now tell me if this resonates.. Even when you see something "out there", the brain predicts and projects.
That is when it has what it thinks is sufficient information, it completes a picture of what it thinks it is seeing and then relates to that picture, as if it were the actual 'object'.

Holy crap, thank you for this. I never recognized this or paid attention to this until you just mentioned it.

Yes. For example, I am looking at my dog right now. But my experience doesn't stop there, because it is not sufficient enough to have an entire understanding. So then, thought sensations also arise, like "Elvis" (the name of my dog), or "he's so cute", as if to give the situation more context and understanding.

Same when a car goes by. All that happened visually was a car going by, but then the mind projects like you said, and I may have thoughts arise like "Wow thats a nice mustang" or "that sounds awful".

(Recalling from memory), yes, the mind predicts too. I may hear a sound, and my mind can predict it to be a gunshot, and so then, a series of reaction takes place lol (even if the mind predicted wrongly!)

That is when it has what it thinks is sufficient information, it completes a picture of what it thinks it is seeing and then relates to that picture, as if it were the actual 'object'.

And wow, yes again. In the gunshot example, yes, it takes up the entire story as the object, versus taking each sensation that occurs 1 by 1 as each individual object.

For example, object 1 may have been sound. Object 2 may have been a thought "was that a gunshot", and then a memory of the same sound in a movie, then the thought "omg a gunshot!", etc... but the mind takes up all of it as 1 completre story, and takes that up as the object.

Now, i put it to you that if you thought that it was a leaf or a fly, you might just brush it away, but if you thought that it might be something that would bite you, there would be a different reaction.
What i am getting at is the responses to anything and everything depends on the story that arises from the stimulus, be that physical or mental. Does this seem accurate to you?

YES. Its funny, as I was making that story, I was even thinking of different scenarios, and how, there could be complete different series' of actions, all by how the mind perceives the situation, basically, whichever thought arises that has the most strength to it.

Yes, of course. There may be the itch that we scratch without being conscious of it.

Lol yes, plus a lot more for me haha

[vinceschubert]

Good evening Ashton, Now there is this thing that we can call direct experiencing. That is experiencing before thought-stories arrive. What it highlights is the inadequacy of language to accurately describe anything.
Another thing it will reveal is the instantaneous and pervasive nature of those thought trains.
Anyway, let's see what transpires with this exercise;
Take a cup and place it in front of you.
Start looking at it and notice thoughts labeling what you see.
Consider the process of looking.
Consider the process of seeing.
Watch thoughts as you consider who is seeing. Notice what happens to seeing as you consider this. Did the seeing stop?
Go back to simply watching thoughts as you look at the cup.
After a while of watching thoughts, they will get bored and slow down. Now look for spaces between thoughts.
Focus on seeing in the spaces. They may be milliseconds but notice them.
There will be no labeling. ..and anyway, the colours, the textures, the shapes, etc will be too subtle, too complex to be accurately described.
As this seeing is happening, ask yourself can there be a seer or a seen without the seeing stopping.
Is there only seeing?
When you finish seeing, do you then see the cup as a story? A cup that has uses and takes up space, and needs washing after use?
..but we aren't actually seeing it anymore. We look at it but recognize a vessel to contain something. The details have vanished leaving an impression.
Please relate your experience...

with love

vince

[ashton]

Take a cup and place it in front of you.
Start looking at it and notice thoughts labeling what you see

Yep, I placed it and started looking at it. Then I noticed the thought "tilting" and "river" (since thats a part of the logo).

Start looking at it and notice thoughts labeling what you see.
Consider the process of looking.
Consider the process of seeing.
Watch thoughts as you consider who is seeing. Notice what happens to seeing as you consider this. Did the seeing stop?

So yep, thoughts came that tried to make sense of what I saw. I then probed myself to consider these 2 processes, and the first thing I noticed was the actual thought of reiterating to consider those processes.

Then what happened, was the foreground of looking at the bottle went to the background, and there was this intermediary point of blank contemplation if that makes sense (where paying attention to visual sensations was in the background, and since no thoughts had been generated yet, the foreground of my experience became "anticipation, or just waiting" for some thought to come).

After this, my foreground sensation became thoughts like "theres the bottle, which can be seen by my eyes".

Experientially, the seeing is there, but it is so far in the background, it goes completely unnoticed.

Go back to simply watching thoughts as you look at the cup.
After a while of watching thoughts, they will get bored and slow down.

It seems like what happened from my perspecticve is, Im looking at the bottle, and thoughts get generated, but, after just a little bit, its as if Ive noticed the majority of things about the bottle, and so the thoughts just stop, or have really long gaps. (I know what Im about to say is just thought content and doesnt really matter lol but here it is):
I think it is because the sight of the bottle become boring, and the thoughts get generated on the basis that Im still interested in what im viewing. So when im sort of withdrawing from the bottle, so do the thoughts. Now this here is de: I noticed that when I become more withdrawn visually from the bottle, my thought content actually changed as well! Into thoughts of how Id answer this question, etc.

Now look for spaces between thoughts.
Focus on seeing in the spaces. They may be milliseconds but notice them.
There will be no labeling. ..and anyway, the colours, the textures, the shapes, etc will be too subtle, too complex to be accurately described.
As this seeing is happening, ask yourself can there be a seer or a seen without the seeing stopping.
Is there only seeing?

Just to make sure I understood what you said properly, focus on the visual object during the spaces, not focus on the gaps in thought itself? Right

And, to make sure I understood your question, I basically took it as "as this seeing is happening, ask yourself can there be a seer or seen while the seeing is occuring? Is there only seeing?"

Now for what happened: I looked for the places inbetween thoughts, and focused on looking at the bottle during the gaps. You're right, there wasn't any labeling or anything, moreso just bare bones seeing, although I also had some hearing sensations when your mind is kinda still. I didn't find any colors or shapes or textures or anything, unless you're meaning, just maybe the added detail of really looking at the bottle?

Then I asked if there can be a seer or seen while I'm seeing, or if there is just seeing. With this, what happened first was honestly thought sensations saying that there is me and this bottle- but now as Im reading this, that is purely just thought that wasn't carefully looked at while I was experiencing.

All that was really happening, was "seeing" just by itself. It seems though, since the thought content of "theres me and this bottle" snuck through and "blindsided me", that my reality wants to try and believe that is true, when it is actually just another sensation.

Now this is just thought content, but I think once Im more able to accurately and consistently see these thoughts arising In the Moment, and not after the fact, of "theres me and this bottle", I think I will begin more and more to recognize it as just plain jane seeing.

When you finish seeing, do you then see the cup as a story? A cup that has uses and takes up space, and needs washing after use?

Not do that degree. The thoughts that occured were more or less "theres a dent", "lookes messy", "oh wow didnt notice that before", and even the most basic "bottle".

The "bottle" one is the one for me that is then seen as story if you will. After all, im just seeing this white thing with different materials, curves, imprints, etc. But the story is in the most basic sense "mug". And all of the additional add-ons.

Ash

[vinceschubert]

Good evening Ash,

Just to make sure I understood what you said properly, focus on the visual object during the spaces, not focus on the gaps in thought itself? Right

Yes, to experience seeing without the labels or descriptions that thoughts offer.
Ha, to focus on the gaps in the thoughts would be more thoughts. Well, maybe. I'll have to do this again myself to see if i can notice the gaps in thought without thinking about it.
Did you notice how looking and seeing are different?

I think it is because the sight of the bottle become boring, and the thoughts get generated on the basis that Im still interested in what im viewing.

Yes, this is interesting, don't you think? the mind insists on being busy. If there's nothing going on, it is uncomfortable and creates content.

With this, what happened first was honestly thought sensations saying that there is me and this bottle

Yes, and when this happened, did the seeing stop?
Can you be aware of the bottle and/or be aware of yourself at the same time as the thoughtless seeing is happening?
Notice how hard we have to work to find the fleeting experience of seeing, and how instantaneous and pervasive the thought stories are.

with love

vince

[ashton]

Did you notice how looking and seeing are different?

Not at the time, but after reading the rest of your questions, yes. It actually occurred just now when I was reading and responding to your post.

Before I started to read your reply and was waiting for the page to load, it was "looking". I was visually looking, but thoughts were there as well, among other sensations.

Once I started to read what you said, it became "seeing". Either thoughts weren't there or they were so far in the background, that all that was happening was "seeing" what you wrote.

Again, thought content incoming- I think it has to do with how absorbed or immersed we are in something.

When Im not totally absorbed in something, then it is "looking"- since other things find their way in, like thoughts. But when Im fully absorbed, it seems to only be 1 sense door, but funny enough, because Im so fully absorbed, it actually doesn't get noticed that way, it is more of a "happening". (This paragraph was all de)

Me: With this, what happened first was honestly thought sensations saying that there is me and this bottle
You: Yes, and when this happened, did the seeing stop?

Yes, every time that there is a thought sensation, it takes me away from "seeing". Its as if I actually begin to observe the thought when it arises, and only when it vanishes, and often times, once ive made sure its vanished and no other thoughts have come up, do I begin to focus back on the bottle (so long as no other sensations are there to distract, like sound, etc.).

Can you be aware of the bottle and/or be aware of yourself at the same time as the thoughtless seeing is happening?

No, it is so weird. Calling from memory since I think this is a better example, whenever I watch like a youtube video or something, its as if theres nothing else going on. It just gets to be complete absorption, "seeing".

Notice how hard we have to work to find the fleeting experience of seeing, and how instantaneous and pervasive the thought stories are.

Yes, crazy lol.

Ash

[vinceschubert]

Good evening Ash, Good stuff. We will marry what you discovered with that exercise with what you find with this one.
If a tree falls in the forest and there is nobody there to hear it, is there a sound?
This is not a koan. Look to science for an answer.

with love

vince

[ashton]

If a tree falls in the forest and there is nobody there to hear it, is there a sound?

At first my answer was going to be pretty much all thought content, but now I see. (still will be of course, but also calling upon memory of de)

No, there really wouldn't. If I were there while it fell, then it'd be heard. But if I'm not there, direct experience-wise, I never would've heard a sound. And the same would be true if nobody was there.

Look to science for an answer.

Not sure what this means lol

Ash

[vinceschubert]

'morning Ash, this is what i was leading to with this question;
When the tree falls, it vibrates the air. These vibrations hit the ear and cause (eventually) nerve signals to arrive in the brain.
It is the brain that translates them into an experience we call sound.
Likewise for all of the senses. The brain has has an experience and projects it onto something that we call the objective world.
Our entire experience of the world including other people happens in our brain.
Certainly there is something 'our there'. ..but what exactly is a mystery (to us) An insect that sees in the infrared spectrum will see something entirely different to us.
Have you ever had the experience of standing with a friend looking at a car and one of you says that it's blue and the other says it's green?
This is where your previous exercise gets married to this one.
Every body lives and relates to their own unique world (including people)

with love

vince

[ashton]

Have you ever had the experience of standing with a friend looking at a car and one of you says that it's blue and the other says it's green?

Nope haha.

Everything else you said makes sense, all sensations have to get processed, especially in order to store these experiences to save under memories

Ash

[vinceschubert]

Good evening Ash, You seemed to have grokked what i have pointed you to so far. So tell me, these interpretations that your brain comes up with, the things that you respond to in your daily life, can you recognize them as the story of Ashton?
The contents of this story, the details outlined in every chapter about how Ashton works, the stuff that he identifies with, including the confusion (the knot), how did they get created?

vince