Who am I?

[FinnApe]

Hi Vivien,

The body is here yes. But where is the I which HAS a body?

There are the sensations and the visual image of the body, but the I which "has" the body can't be found.

There is a tension in the forehead, yes. But where is the one FEELING it?

Nowhere. The tension is simply appearing. When looked at, it's like the tension/sensation goes infinitely deep. Like the ground for it to land, or the mirror for it to be reflected from cannot be found. It just goes on and exists as it is, without the one feeling it. In some sense this tension/sensation is also just floating in space, just like any other appearance.

Focusing on the "feels like" part: Most of the time it feels like the tension is happening in a seemingly enclosed space, it feels like it is kind of crowded and cramped in the body, like it is being reflected by something that owns it, something that experiences it. But when I look I can't find it, yet it seems the belief remains at some level.

Where is the intender? (Again, focus on the 'feels like there is an intender).

Now looking, the intentions seem to come from somewhere. Kind of like intuitions, it feels like it is springing up from perhaps the chest area. There is a sense that there is a feeling that helps form and create the strands of intention. So there is a sense that while the intentions forming doesn't seem to be a conscious process, the intentions might still be formed somehow unconsciously/subconsciously by some inherent self that is forming them, that I am just not aware of. What this is, I don't know. But that story might be why and where the belief is still alive and kicking, even when I can't find the self/the intender when I look.

Yes, thoughts appear in this centralized location, called body. Just as bile produced in this body, and not in other body, so it is also centralized. This body cannot access biles from other bodies, just as it cannot access thoughts produced by other brains.

Makes a lot of sense.

[Vivien]

Hi Marcus,

Now looking, the intentions seem to come from somewhere. Kind of like intuitions, it feels like it is springing up from perhaps the chest area. There is a sense that there is a feeling that helps form and create the strands of intention. So there is a sense that while the intentions forming doesn't seem to be a conscious process, the intentions might still be formed somehow unconsciously/subconsciously by some inherent self that is forming them, that I am just not aware of. What this is, I don't know. But that story might be why and where the belief is still alive and kicking, even when I can't find the self/the intender when I look.

Well, the story by itself doesn’t matter. Your belief in it what matters. And how can you believe a thought? By not seeing that you have NOT thought that thought. It’s not yours. It’s not your doing. You did not create and thought that thought just as much you are not moving the clouds on the sky, or blowing the wind.

Actually, there is NO mover or floater of clourds, mover of wind, rainer of rains, waver of waves, rotator of the Earth. Digester of the food, plumper of the blood, a supervisor of the immune system.

So what is you proof (experiential proof, since we need facts, not theories) that there is a you (ass a thinker) in the first place who could think this thought by its own free will?

I don’t give more questions, only this one. Please dig deep. Don’t rush, be thorough.
Remember, we are looking for factual evidence, not hearsay.

Vivien

[FinnApe]

Hi Vivien,

So what is you proof (experiential proof, since we need facts, not theories) that there is a you (ass a thinker) in the first place who could think this thought by its own free will?

I can't find anything in the moment before a thought pops up. There's just nothing, and then a thought appears. So I can't find any creation process of the thoughts. I especially can't find anyone there forming the thought. It simply appears. Thoughts appear, and then thoughts appear about how "I thought that", as if I created the thought or actively made it happen. But clearly that is just more thought and is not proof of some kind of thinker in any way.

I look at the tree outside, waving in the wind. I look at that, and I look at thoughts at the same time. I am aware of the thoughts being just as spontaneous and as uncontrollable as the tree blowing in the wind. They are both phenomena, simply happening with no-one making them happen.

I can't find any proof for a single thought ever being thought by some kind of thinker. All thoughts appear as they do, and more thoughts might appear about how those thoughts were thought by a thinker. But the thinker remains totally elusive, it's like a mythical figure that thoughts appear about constantly. But no thought has ever seen it or touched it in any way shape or form, and never could. There's no proof of it's existence. It's totally based on belief.

So no, I don't have any proof. The thought story about the thinker is just meaningless.

[Vivien]

Hi Kevin,

I look at the tree outside, waving in the wind. I look at that, and I look at thoughts at the same time. I am aware of the thoughts being just as spontaneous and as uncontrollable as the tree blowing in the wind. They are both phenomena, simply happening with no-one making them happen.

Nice :)

Now look at this.

What is this I that are aware both the tree and thoughts?

Is the body aware?

Is there an I being aware?

Is there an entity being aware?

Or… aware-ing is just another happening?

Vivien

[FinnApe]

Hi Vivien,

What is this I that are aware both the tree and thoughts?

All that is there when looked is the awareness itself. There is no "I" that is aware, there's just the awareness. Awareness of the tree. Awareness of the thoughts. It's impossible to find the "I". Anywhere awareness is placed there it is. Inescapable. Unavoidable.

It's like there's looking as if towards something, but then you're right back where you started looking. An analogy came to mind, where it's kind of like a search/rescue spotlight that is looking around in the dark for signs of light, with the blindingly bright light that it already is.

So the awareness is on the tree yes, the awareness is on the thoughts yes, and then there are thoughts about lets look at the "I" that is aware of this. But awareness cannot be moved anywhere. That would require a controller of awareness. And no such thing can be found. Anywhere awareness goes, there it is. It's all-encompassing, there can be no "I", because that would imply an awareness of awareness -- but that would be just more awareness, already contained within the awareness.

Is the body aware?

Nope. But there is awareness of the body.

Is there an I being aware?

Just awareness. No "I" being aware. An "I" seemingly being aware would be just more awareness. Awareness happening.

Is there an entity being aware?

No. Where would that entity be? If not in awareness, it's nothing. If in awareness it's nothing, as it would be just awareness again. An entity that is being aware can only seem to exist, but really it's totally impossible.

Or… aware-ing is just another happening?

Yes. Aware-ing/awareness is just happening like everything. And also, there is no border found to the awareness. No border where the awareness ends and something else begins.

Now it's starting to look like all there is, is awareness, since it doesn't seem to have a border. How could it be known or seen if anything ever happens outside of awareness? How does or how could this awareness know it is not all there is, since nothing outside it is ever seen as happening? It seems as though anything outside awareness would require belief.

And although there is still not total clarity around all this, it is much much more clear than ever before.

Thanks Vivien,
-Markus

[Vivien]

Hi Marcus,

And although there is still not total clarity around all this, it is much much more clear than ever before.

Great :)

Now let’s look at the concept of awareness. The reason we have to look at it, because it’s a heavily loaded word. The internet is full of information about awareness, and we cannot help but create a concept of it, making it into a thing. Unconsciously we apply all sort of meaning and attributes / characteristics, and we are not even aware of it. More often than not, we personalize it. We making it into a thing, not seeing that it’s not a thing (not a noun), but rather a verb.

So look at this. Is this awareness a noun (non-physical thing), or a verb (happening)?

What other name can you give to ‘it’ if you could not use the word ‘awareness’ or ‘consciousness’?

Notice, I used quotation marks for ‘it’. Because maybe it’s not a it? (Not a noun)?

Please spend a whole day deeply looking at this.

Vivien

[FinnApe]

Hi Vivien,

So look at this. Is this awareness a noun (non-physical thing), or a verb (happening)?

It's a verb, something that is just spontaneously happening. I can see that I was seeing awareness kind of as a thing, when it's just something happening.

What other name can you give to ‘it’ if you could not use the word ‘awareness’ or ‘consciousness’?

Maybe "being" (as in a happening), but yes the word doesn't capture the happening itself.

Notice, I used quotation marks for ‘it’. Because maybe it’s not a it? (Not a noun)?

I see. It's a happening. Like the wind blowing, it's not a graspable, static thing that can be nailed down and defined. The happening of awareness, or the aware-ing seem more accurate. There is a mystery to the happening now, seems kind of alien in a sense, like where is the aware-ing coming from? What is all this?

[Vivien]

Hi Marcus,

There is a mystery to the happening now, seems kind of alien in a sense, like where is the aware-ing coming from? What is all this?

This question is a trick to divert attention from the important to the unimportant. This question hides a big belief….the questioner itself.

So while the question expects and answer, it takes (or hides) a belief as if it were an unquestionable fact. That there is someone there not understanding and wanting to know.

So, instead of trying to find an answer, look for the one who wants to know the answer.

Who/what is asking the question?

Who/what wants to know?

And what for? To know it? To understand it, meaning to put into a category that ‘this means this’ so know I know it?

Also, notice, that with the questions “where is the aware-ing coming from?’ hides another unquestioned assumption taken as a fact… that it indeed comes from somewhere and I just have to figure out the source.

But how can everything / knowing have a source?
How could which is not separate have a source?
If there were a source wouldn’t that be separate from it?

These last 3 questions are rather intellectual / contemplative ones.

But just notice that the questions treat separation as a fact. But is that so?

Vivien

[FinnApe]

Hi Vivien,
this inquiry is exhausting in many ways, but lets keep going, "no time for caution" :)

Who/what is asking the question?

I don't know. Nothing that can be found. The question is another appearance. Another thought. Any kind of answer would be too, and wouldn't get to the "root" of this.

Who/what wants to know?

I don't know who/what. I can't find the "knower". There's just the things going on, including thoughts of that kind.

And what for? To know it? To understand it, meaning to put into a category that ‘this means this’ so know I know it?

Yeah. To have a nice story about it in an attempt to make this more graspable.

But just notice that the questions treat separation as a fact. But is that so?

No signs or proof of it being a fact. There's the appearing, but nothing is outside the appearing. So if only the appearing (what is) can be seen as true, then separation is impossible.

-Markus

[Vivien]

Hi Marcus,

How much of this is actually seen, and how much of this an intellectual understanding only?

What about everyday life?

What changed? What hasn’t?

Is seeking still on?
If there is still seeking, what is it exactly that is being sought?

Vivien

[FinnApe]

Hi Vivien,

How much of this is actually seen, and how much of this an intellectual understanding only?

What can be seen is that all phenomena simply appears, when looked, nothing is found outside the appearing. When looking happens, that is seen, and there is a sort of relaxation to it. Things happening, and the "doer" is not separate, somewhere behind the scenes running the show. It is just a thought, a story. But this seeing still seems to come and go, and there isn't absolute certainty or clarity most of the time.

So in a way there's still some slight doubt if maybe this is just intellectual understanding, yet there is an undoubtable direct experiential element to this as well.

What about everyday life?

Everyday life is still happening just as it always has, there are spontaneous moments where it is seen that things are simply happening with nothing is in control, for example as this is being written. A lot of the time there is very active and loud thought activity going on, which seems to cause some confusion and "clouding" of what is already always here and always the case.

What changed? What hasn’t?

None of the appearance has changed. Thoughts, sensations, feelings, seeing, hearing, all the same as always. In a way, thoughts are "louder" in a way more than ever before. Or at least they are seen to be happening more than before.
If something, a lessening in a sensation of strain happens when the effortlessness is seen. There's more flow, less strain. Less uneasiness and strain with what is happening.

Is seeking still on?
If there is still seeking, what is it exactly that is being sought?

Seeking is still on in some ways it seems. This intense burning desire to know the truth no matter what, felt in the chest/stomach most intensely and the whole body as a kind of intense "buzzing" sensation, especially strongly when it really kind of "builds up" at times, a feeling almost like the body is about to burst from it.

Total clarity and a sense of undeniability is being sought if anything. Seeing with absolute clarity that the self is an illusion.

Maybe that is hiding an expectation and also an assumption about "someone" seeing this, but not seeing with total clarity is what is honest in this experience at least now. And it seems that clarity is something that can happen without a need for a sense of self. There would be a feeling of "pretending" if I tried to say it is all totally clear when it really isn't. So what is being "sought" is to see the self as an illusion, but it's not expected in the sense that "someone" sees the illusion, just that the seeing of the illusion is what happens in a clear way. Hopefully this is helpful.

-Markus

[Vivien]

Hi Marcus,

So what is being "sought" is to see the self as an illusion, but it's not expected in the sense that "someone" sees the illusion, just that the seeing of the illusion is what happens in a clear way. Hopefully this is helpful.
But this seeing still seems to come and go, and there isn't absolute certainty or clarity most of the time.

It’s time to examine your expectation. Since it seems that you expect clarity as a continuous state of seeing. Well, I have some bad news :)

This is just the BEGINNING not the end. What is happening is called yo-yoing. Sometimes it’s seen, sometimes it’s not. But the seeing is never fully lost, since every time it’s looked for, it’s seen again. It might be temporarily obscured, but it can be reliably seen sooner or later with some investigation. If this is how it is for you, then this is what we call ‘seeing through the self illusion’.

This exploration is a beginning and not an ending. Generations of misperceptions, learned knowledge, and a life time of accumulated beliefs and conditioning do not fall away overnight when realisation happens. What begins is the undoing of these misperceptions that keep us yo-yoing between clarity and confusion. How long this undoing takes is different for everyone. Expectations of overnight change when realisation happens can be problematic as the shift in perception can be quite subtle, and can be missed as there are expectations of what should happen, how it should look, feel and be.

When the self is seen through (the state of yo-yoing), then the process has started. But LOTS of further looking and investigation is needed to gradually and slowly to stabilize. It doesn’t happen overnight, not even in a few weeks or month. Usually it takes years, for most of us (depending on many factors, how much emotional trauma one carries, how much one invests in having identities in all sort of personal beliefs, but most importantly how much openness is there to keep looking as long as it takes.)

What now needs to be seen through is the conditioning that keeps pulling you back into identification. Years and years of conditioning that you have identified yourself with/as, won’t fall away overnight. This process – yo-yoing between clarity and re-identification - can take several years, as I mentioned before. This phase of undoing includes looking at old trauma’s/experiences/patterns that trigger reactions, so as to ‘unhook yourself’ from the stories that have emotions and beliefs attached to them, because this keeps the idea that there is something happening to a someone, a ‘me’….which is identification.

Total clarity and a sense of undeniability is being sought if anything. Seeing with absolute clarity that the self is an illusion.

The issue is that you equate ‘absolute clarity’ with no more yo-yoing, right?

Do you see how much expectations can be in the way?

I know how it is, or how it should be, and currently it’s not like that, so it means that there is no absolute clarity. Do you see the falsity of this logic?

Vivien

[FinnApe]

Hi Vivien,
I see what you're saying. I will keep looking at this again and again despite the sense of uncertainty at times. Surprisingly, there has been some increases in clarity after the last post, where I recognized that there it is completely hopeless for "me" to ever grasp or understand this. I will make some statements from direct experience below to perhaps clarify this:

• The "me" is simply unfindable in direct experience, whereas before there was a strong sense that the "me" is somewhere, it just needs to be found and clarified.

• What is occurring is a) visual appearances b) sensations c) emotions d) sounds e) tastes/smells f) thoughts, and nothing else. The "me" can't be found to occur anywhere outside of these phenomena.

• There's a recognition that who I think I am/the "me" is nothing but thoughts. A thought story that seems to tie together the other phenomena other than thought (a,b,c,d,e) into a cohesive identity/me. But in reality, the thought story is independent of the phenomena (a,b,c,d,e) and the phenomena don't need the thoughts to exist for them to be.

• The confusion is occurring in thought, which is itself occurring in this prior aliveness of what is, which can't be grasped by any thought or other phenomena.

• Right now as this is being written, there is clarity, but this seeing has been here before, yet it has seemed to go away, so I assume it might go away again.

In regard to the last point, based on what you said, clarity is an expectation. Now there's more of an acceptance of that too, at first it resulted in frustration, but it's ok now, or at least the frustration is seen as simply more phenomena. And oddly enough, that results in more clarity. Still, there is lots of confusion a lot of the time.

[Vivien]

Hi Marcus,

Thank you for your update. Now let’s start to dig deep into the notion of control. In the following days, I’m going to give you different exercises. Please make sure that you repeat them several times, before replying.

What do you do in order to see?
What do you do in order to hear?
What do you do in order to feel?
What do you do in order to taste and smell?

What do you do for thoughts to be?

What do you do in order for the body to be?

Is there anything that does not happen automatically?

Is there anything that needs your doing? Or everything is just happening?

Please investigate each questions thoroughly many times throughout the day.
Let me know what you find.

Vivien

[FinnApe]

Hi Vivien,

What do you do in order to see?
What do you do in order to hear?
What do you do in order to feel?
What do you do in order to taste and smell?

Nothing is being done by anyone. These are simply things that appear, seeing appears, hearing appears, feeling appears, tasting and smelling appear.

What do you do for thoughts to be?

Thoughts appear and thoughts are. Nothing is being done for them to be, and there is no person that can be found who could "make" thoughts be.

What do you do in order for the body to be?

Nothing. It simply is.

Is there anything that does not happen automatically?

No, there isn't any sign of something that would not happen automatically. Everything is just happening, happening automatically, including the movement of fingers on the keyboard as this is being written. All sounds, all feelings, all that is seen, all thoughts, all tastes/smells are just happening. All there is, is an awareness that recognizes and sees all of this happening here and now, but the awareness, or aware-ing is not separate from what is happening at all.

Is there anything that needs your doing? Or everything is just happening?

I can't find anything that could possibly need my doing, and even the idea of "my doing" is impossible, since it would be simply another happening, another appearance. All things are just happening if they do, including the idea of a "doer" or the appearance of any kind of doubtful thoughts. And there's just no way out of that.