Requesting a guide.

[IainB]

I realised today that it's now been several weeks since I did the looking 100 times a day strategy. The seasons move on as our conversation unfolds and it's early winter here now. Sometimes the day is filled with work, and the evening watching the latest about the war and the economy and drinking wine. Some days have passed with very little looking, or others with just a focused hour or two in order to reply to your questions. Or I have woken in the early hours and spent some hours replying (which I do enjoy) but this has been a different kind of consciousness to that filling the day of activity and opportunity to enquire. Not all days, some have felt potent and filled with clarity. I thought to ask today if you might include or encourage pointers to look 100ish times a day perhaps.

Overwhelming I think it's doubt that prevents seeing, rather than fear. I did list fear though, alongside expectations so will answer.

Can you look into this fear?

I can't drum up any fear currently. Some fatigue, excitement about the future, frustration at the poor weather, confusion as some seeking appears, but no real fear.

What is being feared exactly?

There was an idea that seeing through the illusion is commensurate with a loss, maybe an inability to feel control or direction in life (despite this being an illusion of course).

What is the worst thing that could happen if it's seen that there is no one at the core governing life?

Hmmm possibly the seeker may feel freed up to act upon latent or explicit suicidal ideation? From a cultural perspective that might be considered bad. I do quite enjoy being around though. Perhaps the worst would be the indulgence of seeking, believing there is something I might do now to influence a better tomorrow, is seen as hollow and just a play of thoughts.

[IainB]

Perhaps the worst would be the indulgence of seeking, believing there is something I might do now to influence a better tomorrow, is seen as hollow and just a play of thoughts.

This isn't so much the outcome of a fear scenario, but rather the lived reality at this location here already.

what is seen cannot be unseen.

So you might suggest that this phrase better read what is seen cannot be unseen except for when it is temporarily believed in again. Okay.

Is the I something more or something else in experience than the word/thought 'I' itself?

There must be something. I know I am. Experience doesn't know it is, or does it somehow? There is a great/simple mystery here that allows for you to be you (or at least for experience to unfold at your location) and for me to be me (or at least for experience to unfold at this location). Or is there only me, in which an illusion of others appears? Surely not, and that is just the limitation of concepts/mind grasping to make sense.

[IainB]

Ian in turn, taking this to be true and important.
What is this I here, right now that you are repeatedly referring to in the above quote?

I'm note sure if there is a word for it. This is where the limitations of the forum and words and typing hit home. It's easy to pick up on the use of I, the add on, the addition, and question the validity of this, ask what it points too. There is a separation here. A knowing. A wild free flowing only now. Sometimes contentment. Sometimes anger. Sometimes bliss. Sometimes pain. All known.

[Vivien]

I thought to ask today if you might include or encourage pointers to look 100ish times a day perhaps.

I always encourage that. If looking is happens only in a designated time and the rest of the day is spent believing in personhood, then what's the point? Then it's just like meditation, something the separate person does. This needs to be seen in the midst of everyday life. When the personhood is the strongest.

There was an idea that seeing through the illusion is commensurate with a loss, maybe an inability to feel control or direction in life

this is very common. But this were the case, then it ALREADY must be the case, it's has ALWAYS BEEN the case, sine there has never ever been control. Things have always happened automatically on their own. How could control or the direction of life be lost if there is ALREADY no control over it?

Overwhelming I think it's doubt that prevents seeing, rather than fear.

What is being doubted exactly? What is in question?

Hmmm possibly the seeker may feel freed up to act upon latent or explicit suicidal ideation?..... do quite enjoy being around though.

Well, the seeker = separate self. If the self in seen to be an illusion only, then it wouldn't be taken so seriously?

Well, if suicidal ideation is an issue, a frequent visitor, then that's a different topic and might needs a professional help. But if life is enjoyed, as you mentioned, then why would this be an issue?

Perhaps the worst would be the indulgence of seeking,

Why would there be an indulgence in seeking if the self is seen through? If it's really seen through, seeking drops. If it's not, then it's not really seen only intellectually understood.

believing there is something I might do now to influence a better tomorrow, is seen as hollow and just a play of thoughts.

Do you mean that there will be no desire to make life better? When it's seen that t here is no personal self, it doesn't mean that we become lifeless, just sitting there, not doing anything all day long. If my kitchen is flooded, or my house is on fire, I'm not going to sit there doing nothing. :) Things will be done just as now... what can lessen is the stress all about the outcome. Of course, I would prefer to save my house, but if it cannot be saved, then probably there would be less devastating feeling around it.

but if you believe these thoughts, they can indeed prevent you from looking and actually seeing it.

So you might suggest that this phrase better read what is seen cannot be unseen except for when it is temporarily believed in again. Okay.

Yes. But there is an emphasis on 'temporarily'.

There must be something. I know I am. Experience doesn't know it is, or does it somehow? There is a great/simple mystery here that allows for you to be you (or at least for experience to unfold at your location) and for me to be me (or at least for experience to unfold at this location). Or is there only me, in which an illusion of others appears? Surely not, and that is just the limitation of concepts/mind grasping to make sense.

Well, saying that I DON'T exist is very different from seeing that the I DOES NOT exist.

I exist, but do I exists as something?
Am I an entity?
Is there an entity here, present right now?
or there is only existence?

In short, is there a being (noun / entity), or there is being (as a verb / happening)?
that's the big difference between believing in a personal self and seeing what is.

There is a separation here.

There is separation here, right now? Are you sure? Are you sure that this is true in experience and not only thought based?

If you don't use thoughts and analysis, like saying I am here sitting in my living room, and Vivien is over there in Australia.... so we must be separate... if you don't go there... but rather to the pure, unadulterated experience as it is right now, HOW is separation actually experienced? is it really experienced? or only thought says so?

V

[IainB]

if you...go...to the pure, unadulterated experience as it is right now, HOW is separation actually experienced? is it really experienced? or only thought says so?

Sure. It's amazing isn't is. What Is is so wide as to encompass what you are, what I am, everything/the universe.

There is experiencing here, and that experience includes a knowing of you. There is experience at the V location, and a character Ian is known, but only thought/analysis takes that and suggests separation. There is no edge. Everything that ever happened is happening now, and for reasons unknown life scatters like light through an Ian-shaped prism and crashes here as a wave of experience

It so healthy to see right through the limitations of mind. To rely upon mind is to try and know the world using only one sense, with the others blocked entirely off. Yes there is a knowing of sorts, but through the narrowest of tunnels with the wider and greater picture missed.

There might be a temptation to slip into solipsism, that there is only 'my' experience here, with others an illusion. But it's so clear that ideas like that are simply the very limited mind having a best attempt at getting what is, and getting is very wrong because of the huge limitations of mind. Thought/mind appears in the much wider/greater all what is.

The universe isn't a cloudy sparkly picture of a galaxy with an arrow 'you are here'. That's just a idea from science that offers an explanation. In truth I am everything-you-all-universe-all known. I love the LU quote "there is nothing unknown"...how could there be.

[IainB]

I always encourage that...to look 100ish times a day perhaps.

I went back to find a good pointer, and I'm printing it out to carry around with me to encourage lookings.

100 times of small lookings…gradually become second nature. It becomes automatic, as a default setting. […] There is always more to look at, more beliefs, more conditionings, getting deeper and more subtle.

approach this with curiosity…What can I discover today? What is here right now, that I'm not seeing? Or mis-seeing? Mis-interpreting? Mistaking for a me?

[IainB]

I always encourage that...to look 100ish times a day.

Looking's great isn't it. Many Lookings even better. I want to set myself a reminder here to remember to look deeply at sensation, at how thought does a suggested body part image such as head and see that something else then also happening - believing in personhood, stumbling around hypnotised in separation - and seeing the illusion there of course. Crazy isn't it, I am just a mistaken believing (and all of actual life too).

Again, to paraphrase you every single time when looking, it can be seen again and again, reliably and repeatedly.

Forum conversations roll on but of course the pointers have all been given. There is always the pop of excitement to see the email announcing the guide has replied (will it be platitudes, or a telling off?!), the seeker is all about more, more, more and next, next, next. But it's good to take responsiblity myself and be firm about coming back to Lookings as Looking gradually become second nature. It becomes automatic, as a default setting (fingers crossed).

How could control or the direction of life be lost if there is ALREADY no control over it?

Sure. The separate-personhood-Me sure has some irrational beliefs.

What is being doubted exactly? What is in question?

I have a deep self sabotage cynicism that feeds off doubt and forever lurks in the corner. It feeds deeply from beliefs that I don't deserve to be happy etc, loves a good drink of low self esteem and anxiety whenever it can. All things that can be looked at at any point with a therapist, with the shaman or at a 12 step meeting etc and as you say, things that remain in place regardless of seeing or not and can be worked on after/later. This is much more below the surface these days as I've been really happy for a few years since ayahuascaing. But I do believe that this prevents seeing here, or when seeing is seen it pulls me below the surface again.

[suicidal ideation] If the self in seen to be an illusion only, then it wouldn't be taken so seriously?

I do have empathy with people with nasty suicidal ideation. My career involves work with lots of damaged people. So I do take this seriously. For me though it's more of a positive thing, for example I love the intimate exposure to my death that shamanic medicine offers, and when I'm at favourite high beauty spots on beautiful days I do 'brave' myself to jump off.

But you ask about things being taken less seriously when Me's seen through. I hope so. I'll see when I'm there.

Why would there be an indulgence in seeking if the self is seen through? If it's really seen through, seeking drops. If it's not, then it's not really seen only intellectually understood.

Then the end of seeking must have parallels with every single time when looking, it can be seen again and again, reliably and repeatedly. These two must be friends. They are the 'conclusion' 'reached', in this always-new-only-ever-always-now.

I return also to 'it cannot be known in advance" too:

It's a fine balancing act between 'wanting something' and so dialoguing and seeking here...and what is actually here to be got. As long as the two are different, only the former is apparent and the latter is missed. And yet the latter was never absent, never actually missing, here all along. The latter Is what I Am. Life is bizarre.

When it's seen that there is no personal self, it doesn't mean that we become lifeless, just sitting there, not doing anything all day long.

Ok.

But there is an emphasis on 'temporarily'.

Ahah. Ok. So lets go for what is seen cannot be unseen except for when it's temporarily believed in again.

Some might label this as a bit of a mind-fuck, but I am signed up. I know where you're coming from. I'm with you. I'm paid up and in too deep to get out. As the Irish porter says in the joke "follow me, I'm right behind you".

I exist, but do I exist as something?
Am I an entity?
Is there an entity here, present right now?
or there is only existence?

I think because Ian's life is distinct (from the life 'others' have), and could be said to have a history, because Ian has 'characteristics' then a step too far is taken and the personhood-I-Me is fully believed in. In the life-movie the different characters V and Ian appear. The character Ian is known and Ian believes himself to be real.

I'll write the above pointer down and take it with me with the others.

Thanks,

[Vivien]

There might be a temptation to slip into solipsism

Solipsism is always thought based.

That's just a idea from science that offers an explanation. In truth I am everything-you-all-universe-all known.

Isn't this just a nice phrase you've learned? :) I'm not here to told you off, as you suggested something similar, rather my job is to point out when you are in your head, when you are philosophizing, analyzing, entertaining nice ideas, and this is what you do most of the time. That's normal and that's the default, but this is what needs to be left aside. This is an experiential discovery, not something to entertain the mind. Your intellect is not needed. Just leave it alone. Turn away form thoughts, and look what is there, 'under', 'behind', or 'regardless' of thoughts. Look from there.

But you ask about things being taken less seriously when Me's seen through. I hope so. I'll see when I'm there.

Well you won't be there! Since there is no you to get there :) the one that wants to see this and get there is not there :) That's the whole point to see and discover.

It's a fine balancing act between 'wanting something' and so dialoguing and seeking here...

Ok... inquire into this:

Seeing is happening, yes, but is there a seeker?
Or only seeking is happening but without an entity / agency doing it?
Like raining is happening, but without a rainer?
Wind is happening, but without a wind-blower?

And yet the latter was never absent, never actually missing, here all along. The latter Is what I Am. Life is bizarre.

Well, just notice how much clinging is there to define what I am.... What if there is no I to be anything?
What if life is, but no I to say "I am life"... or "I am this or that"?
Existence is.... but is there actually someone there claiming "I am everything"?

The character Ian is known and Ian believes himself to be real.

This is a statement, but can you actually prove in experience that there is an Ian believing itself to be real?

I think because Ian's life is distinct (from the life 'others' have),

But is this really true? Is there an Ian having life?
Or there is only life + a thought narrative about history?

[IainB]

By telling off I didn't mean the issuing of reprimands or admonishment, but rather you calling me out for philosophizing, analyzing and expressing fluffy ideas when I should rather be looking, seeing clearly the absence of the believed in person (temporarily, can be lost, but known again when looked - I learned that from you), and expressing this clearly and succinctly. Or you suggesting my answer to a question has been lifted straight from a phrase I saw that came from a teacher, because that's easier than looking myself. Or you establishing that I spend most of my time in thought rather than looking outwith the mind.

The more relevent point for me was that my patterns seem to contract me into a relationship with a guide where I'm ready to respond to crticism or praise and really I may need to break through this somehow.

All that's fine. It doesn't change the fact that all I have to work with is my experience here and now. That which is labeled colour, sensation etc. The having of thought and the knowing that thought content is ephemeral rather than real, yet still being sucked into it. Knowing that there is only now, yet is always experienced as new. The grasping that there is something here that might offer some control or influence over life. That there is something called LU, and something here engaged and trying to get something. There is life here. And yes, no doubt all those faults you describe that limit seeing.

Well you won't be there! Since there is no you to get there :) the one that wants to see this and get there is not there :) That's the whole point to see and discover.

Yes, yes. The separate self wants this for itself but of course it is the end of the self, the seeing through of the self that is the end. I am confused though as to how this can be any different to what is here and now as I type. This moment now. There is of course the idea of an imagined future in which the believed me is absent, but I know that to be an idea only. And I am commited to turning away from thought, as you guide.

Seeking is happening, yes, but is there a seeker?

There are thoughts about something missing, or how things might be improved...so this seeking is seen. I can't identify the seeker. Nor is the absence of a seeker clearly seen.

Or only seeking is happening but without an entity / agency doing it?

This must be the case as a seperate entity doesn't make sense and cannot be found. As I type this now there is the knowing that I need to look at this lots to somehow realise it.

Like raining is happening, but without a rainer?
Wind is happening, but without a wind-blower?

Yes nice analogies. I'm sure these can help.

Well, just notice how much clinging is there to define what I am.... What if there is no I to be anything?

I love this. I will use it tomorrow to look. You have given me lots of other pointers to look at too,

Thanks,

[IainB]

Well, just notice how much clinging there is to define what I am.... What if there is no I to be anything?

It really strikes me that 'the drive to see', that striving energy that makes the thoughts about returning to the forum or taking my notes of guided points from my pocket or remembering that I'm not looking seem powerful and compelling may actually be preventing me from seeing. Is this just a big manifestation of seeking and my wanting something.

As with your advice to turn away and look away from thought and intellect, should I perhaps respond to any clinging with a decisive openess to there being no answers, no outcome that the mind can contain, no I to be got or to be anything.

What if life is, but no I to say "I am life"... or "I am this or that"?

Absolutley. Without referring to thought there simply is no objection. I cast aside any thoughts or symbols that might narrate or contain or express this. Any move towards any said explanation is not that clear seeing that there is nothing to give that explanation.

is there actually someone there claiming "I am everything"?

No, of course. This is entirely thought. Possibly a more subtle attempt to explain, and no doubt using words lifted from the last facebook meme I happened to see, but of course just some new or recurring thoughts.

I have not had a chance to answer everything yet.

Thanks,

[Vivien]

As with your advice to turn away and look away from thought and intellect, should I perhaps respond to any clinging with a decisive openess to there being no answers, no outcome that the mind can contain, no I to be got or to be anything.

Well, that would be just trying to brainwash myself into believing that there is no self, like a make-belief. We don't want that. What we want is to see if there is actually someone there seeking.
so instead of trying to think about it and convince yourself that there is no one there, rather LOOK and SEARCH for the one that is seeking right now. Do you see the difference?

V: is there actually someone there claiming "I am everything"?

I: No, of course. This is entirely thought. Possibly a more subtle attempt to explain, and no doubt using words lifted from the last facebook meme I happened to see, but of course just some new or recurring thoughts.

But do you really, really SEE this in experience? Do you see this right now? And now? And what about now?

It's very common to mistake our understanding for seeing. Way too common. But understanding is not seeing. Understanding is a belief, seeing is an experience.

[IainB]

Well, that would be just trying to brainwash myself into believing that there is no self, like a make-belief. We don't want that. What we want is to see if there is actually someone there seeking [...] Do you see the difference?

That's good that it's possible to really see (even if temporarily, but consistently with each looking) that there is no separate Ian/personhood/I/me here, rather than just new beliefs in a new set of thoughts about this. A brainwashed make-belief surely cannot compare to the real thing.

I do enjoy looking intently for where the entity is or what it is. Thoughts appear but are disregarded and looking continues. In particular as I lie in the quiet. Sensation is looked, colour is looked, there is a remembering 'to look for the character' again and again.

Do you see this right now?

I can see how I have favoured understanding over seeing in the past. My whole life has been a valuing of understanding, with new thoughts replacing old, 'my understanding is special and better than others', 'there are complex things I do not understand but which do not interest me or I will never get'.

do you really, really SEE this in experience? ... now ... now ... now?

I screw my eyes tight shut and look, look, look. There is sensation, black, sounds heard, all movement towards thought content is avoided.

It's hard to share, thought puts an I before words to try to share the experience. Or thought will offer other suggestions referring to sensations. I'll just keep looking and not worry about thought.

[IainB]

Well, just notice how much clinging is there to define what I am.... What if there is no I to be anything?

I'm not sure how to answer this. I would prefer to just keep looking. I can't grasp no Is and anythings.

What if life is, but no I to say "I am life"... or "I am this or that"?

I really don't want to come up with a stream of thoughts to answer this. Too complicated.

Existence is.... but is there actually someone there claiming "I am everything"?

Tonight I do not trust my previous pattern of looking at the question, waiting for a set of thoughts to come up to answer it, writing this down, and then waiting for the next question. I simply do not know, and I am not ashamed to tell you that I do not know, and I am not ashamed to not know. I relish the frustration, confusion and disappointment I feel. I hate my seeking and I wish to destroy it. I refuse to hate-shame myself that there is anything wrong or missing about me.

The character Ian is known and Ian believes himself to be real.

This is a statement, but can you actually prove in experience that there is an Ian believing itself to be real?

I have no idea. I would prefer to just do some looking and relaxing.

I think because Ian's life is distinct (from the life 'others' have),

But is this really true? Is there an Ian having life?
Or there is only life + a thought narrative about history?

I don't understand how I reached this point. I cannot get beyond the place of experiencing my life as unique. I anticipate you will ask 'but what is the my coming up with that statement about unique experience'. Perhaps life just likes to show up as an experience that is taken to be separation.

[IainB]

I'll repeat that last point because I didn't use the quotation tool correctly. I also don't know the double quote where you can get the greeny orange within the orange.

I think because Ian's life is distinct (from the life 'others' have),

But is this really true? Is there an Ian having life?
Or there is only life + a thought narrative about history?

I don't understand how I reached this point. I cannot get beyond the place of experiencing my life as unique. I anticipate you will ask 'but what is the 'my' coming up with that statement about unique experience'. Perhaps life just likes to show up as an experience that is taken to be separation.

I don't want to engage with thought any longer as part of the work here. I don't feel it's helping.

I feel as though I am a child who has learned to identify themselves as distinct, with a body separate from an external world, with narrative thought creating a vivd internal world of dialogue and I have somehow tasked myself with now breaking that down and disolving it. Something is fighting to hold on.

[IainB]

Forgive my ramblings above. I had a real surge of anger and anxiety and frustration come up early yesterday that left me drained.

I was looking in the early part of this morning.

Thought voraciously labels. As soon as sensations or colour is looked towards, then content appears about something, an entity, having that sensation. Same with colour etc.

A sequence of thoughts are known. They are taken to be real in the same way sensation and colour are real.

Then there is a stepping back. A wait a moment. There is a return to the simplicity of sensation or colour and without referring to thought again, there is no separation and no entity viewing colour or feeling sensation.

There is a familiarity and an 'at homeness' when pulled into thought, a default position. Which is somewhat strange as they are all unchosen. And many are uncomfortable. The confusion must lie in thought.

There is a strong wish to see what is going on here with thought. Thought asserts a pull each time thought content is entered into. They tend to transfix but subside and looking takes place.  

The simplicity is just to look and know when it is remembered to simply look. It takes a favouring of looking over thought content.

Thanks,