Don't know

[Buddho]

LU is focused guiding for seeing there is no real, inherent 'self' - what do you understand by this?
I understand by the aim of LU that here I get support to explore what the reality of living really is about. With no real inherent self I understand that there is no independent solid identity which is seperate from the world.

What are you looking for at LU?
I'm hoping to really see and understand that I am no self and that I can let go of tring to grasp and control which often causes stress and suffering. So I hope to gain more peace and freedom and to live more in accordance to reality.

What do you expect from a guided conversation?
I expect to discover more areas of clinging and grasping which I'm not yet aware of. My plan is to report about my contemplations and explorations and hopefully I'll get some feedback from my guide about this reports. Maybe there are some things which are no clear and which the guide can explain and encourage me where I should look at. I hope the conversations will be friendly and maybe also compassionate.

What is your experience in terms of spiritual practices, seeking and inquiry?
I did some buddhist retreats and stayed at meditation centers regulary for some periods of time. I'll have some friends which share my interest in spirituality and to which I like to talk about. I'll have a regular daily meditation practise.

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

[warissem]

Hi

I am glad to walk with you and help you see through the illusion of a separate self.

I invite you to be in tune with me on this :

Post once a day and answer to my questions with great honesty and after having looked at direct experience.
Leave aside all books, audios, videos about spirituality, enlightenment, ...
Be committed to this process 24/7 and maintain the flow of looking at direct experience
Read the disclaimer text
Learn how to use the quote function.

Let me know if you agree, then we can begin.

Warissem

[Buddho]

Hi Warissem,

thanks for guiding me on this exploration.
I read your explanations and agree on them!

[warissem]

Hi Buddho

Are you familiar with looking at direct experience ?

In the realm of things there is seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching (or sensations) and all other stuff is thoughts stories. There is a difference between "imagining a glass of water" and " taking a glass of water in your hands". Imagining drinking water doesn't quench the thirst.
When I ask : what is the color of the sky right now ?
You can give an answer through memory (the last time you have seen the sky) or guess it OR LOOK at direct experience, look at the sky and SEE its color before giving the answer. During this investigation, we are interested in direct experience. You read my question, look at what it is pointing to with your five senses then give an answer through what is given by the five senses.

If this is clear for you, we can go on.

Warissem

[Buddho]

Yes it is clear to me what you mean. We can go on,

[warissem]

Hi again

What is expected to happen after seeing through the belief in a separate self ?
What will change in your life ?

Take your time and ponder on each question.

Warissem

[Buddho]

Hi again Warrisem!

After seeing through the belief in a seperate self it will be clear that it is only a belief and nothing real. Tension and narrowness will disappear. It will be more open and free.
My life will change in that way, that my experiences will be less self-centered, more connected, more loving. There will be more peace.

[warissem]

Good evening

Sit comfortably, close your eyes : look at what you call "myself" and describe what you find.

Best wishes

Warissem

[Buddho]

Good evening Warissem,
this are my notes of the last maybe 10min:

There are thoughts about what I was just doing before, feelings of happiness and relief which are just slowly fading away and calming down. A thought of I just feel/felt so happy. A belief that I am just lying on my bed with closed eyes, opening them and typing on my laptop. A sense of feeling and opening up into the body sensations, of feeling the warmth and weight, the rising and falling of the chest area. A sense of exploring the inside what is there. Looking for the center of this thing which is call I. Feels like I am the space in which all this happens now. But the space is perceived so it cannot be me. A disruption happening like feeling confused, but which instantly fades away. A feeling of tension in the shoulder area and an identification idea like I am the body and feeling somehow tense. Which fades away and heavyness and tiredness arises. Couple of thoughts arising "I don't want to do this any more" followed by a feeling of being bored. Is it me that is bored? Who is bored? Curiosity arises. Followed by doubt "Am I doing it right?".

cheers
Buddho

[warissem]

Hi Buddho

You have done good observations. My question is about looking at yourself. Your answers were about appearances and thoughts. You agree with me that you have not seen "yourself" and appearances and thoughts are not yourself. It is fine that you have seen the space and noticed that it is an object, not you. I want you to deepen this through an investigation.

You can do this exercise wherever you are all along the day. Just focus on one of the senses at a time and answer to the questions after having looked at direct experience.

Does seeing need you to happen ?
Is Buddho doing the seeing ?
Is "what is seen" separate from the knowing of it ?
Is there a seer, a knower ?

Do the same exercise for the other senses : hearing, smelling, tasting and touching.

Best for you

Warissem

[Buddho]

Hi warissem,

this question "Is "what is seen" separate from the knowing of it ?"
Is it about the difference/sameness between the object which is seen and the act of seeing itself?
Can you clarify please?

Thank you very much
Buddho

[warissem]

Hi Buddho

Is it about the difference/sameness between the object which is seen and the act of seeing itself?

Yes.

Is there a need to act to see or is seeing happening ?

Warissem

[Buddho]

Seeing:
I'm not creating it, I'm not sustaining it. I can close my eyes then I see darkness, when I open them again I see the room as before. So one could say that I need to open my eyes to see. But also this decision is taking place by itself without me being really involved in it. So I am not doing the seeing.
I'm seeing the screen of my laptop. But the fact of seeing by itself is not really seperate from what is seen. I cannot really label it. "The screen of my laptop" is only a thought, not the act of seeing. So there is a difference between labeling the seen and the act if seeing.
In the moment of seeing there is neither a seer nor a knower. It is only seeing and knowing. The seer and knower is only an idea which can be put on the experience afterwards.

Hearing:
It somehow needs my attention to put on hearing. I did not notice hearing when I was exploring the seeing. But after the attention is tuned on hearing it is happening by itself. So it does not need me.
Obviously there is no "hearer"

Tasting:
With this sense somehow there is a conviction that without me there will be no tasting. It very feels like me who is tasting.
In that moment of tasting there seems to be a "taster". But can not directly perceive and know him and the "taster" is only an idea.

Smelling:
As with other senses it only needs the decision to put attention on smelling. If there is an obvious smell which often isn't there the smelling will happen by itself.
Obviously I am not doing the smelling nor is there a "smeller"

Touching
The same with touching. I'm not doing or sustaining it. It happens by itself as long as the conditions for it are there to keep it going. I does not need me as a "toucher" to experience touching.

[warissem]

Hi Buddho

Seeing:
I'm not creating it, I'm not sustaining it. I can close my eyes then I see darkness, when I open them again I see the room as before.

Is there really an “I”, a you doing things ?

So one could say that I need to open my eyes to see.

There is seeing even when eyes are closed : the back of eyelids is seen as darkeness. Can you stop the seeing ?

But also this decision is taking place by itself without me being really involved in it. So I am not doing the seeing.

Yes, decision is taking place without you. Have you really seen that ?

I'm seeing the screen of my laptop.

Seeing is happening, there is no you to do it.

But the fact of seeing by itself is not really seperate from what is seen. I cannot really label it. "The screen of my laptop" is only a thought, not the act of seeing. So there is a difference between labeling the seen and the act if seeing.

Good observations.

In the moment of seeing there is neither a seer nor a knower. It is only seeing and knowing. The seer and knower is only an idea which can be put on the experience afterwards.

Yes.

Hearing:
It somehow needs my attention to put on hearing.

I invite to look at attention with scrutiny: what is it ? how it works ?

I did not notice hearing when I was exploring the seeing. But after the attention is tuned on hearing it is happening by itself. So it does not need me.
Obviously there is no "hearer"

Yes, there is no hearer, is there a noticer ? an explorer ?

Tasting:
With this sense somehow there is a conviction that without me there will be no tasting. It very feels like me who is tasting.
In that moment of tasting there seems to be a "taster". But can not directly perceive and know him and the "taster" is only an idea.

Is there really you who is tasting ?
Does tasting need you to happen ?

Smelling:
As with other senses it only needs the decision to put attention on smelling. If there is an obvious smell which often isn't there the smelling will happen by itself.
Obviously I am not doing the smelling nor is there a "smeller"

We will investigate decision later.

Touching
The same with touching. I'm not doing or sustaining it. It happens by itself as long as the conditions for it are there to keep it going. I does not need me as a "toucher" to experience touching.

Yes, good.

Best for you

Warissem

[Buddho]

Hi Warrisem!

Seeing:
I'm not creating it, I'm not sustaining it. I can close my eyes then I see darkness, when I open them again I see the room as before.

Is there really an “I”, a you doing things ?

Not really. But it keeps sneeking in somehow when thinking about it and when planing and exploring.

So one could say that I need to open my eyes to see.

There is seeing even when eyes are closed : the back of eyelids is seen as darkeness. Can you stop the seeing ?

I could turn off the lights, or theoretically blind myself. But now in this moment I can't stop the seeing.

But also this decision is taking place by itself without me being really involved in it. So I am not doing the seeing.

Yes, decision is taking place without you. Have you really seen that ?

I don't know if I really saw that in that moment. But checking now, there are impulses coming which result in acting. It is a cause and effect process which runs by itself.

Hearing:
It somehow needs my attention to put on hearing.

I invite to look at attention with scrutiny: what is it ? how it works ?

I read this sentence "look at attention...". Thinking about it takes place, attention is put on attention itself, I remember how this thing called attention wandered from seeing the sentence, to the thought processes caused by it and how it is then put on itself. Also here there are causes which make the attention switch or "jump" from one thing to another. But then is it the same attention which wanders? No the attention arises and passes away with the perception of the object. There is actually no me or mine involved in it. The thought of "Me doing all this" is put on these processes afterwards.

I did not notice hearing when I was exploring the seeing. But after the attention is tuned on hearing it is happening by itself. So it does not need me.
Obviously there is no "hearer"

Yes, there is no hearer, is there a noticer ? an explorer ?

At that moment there was a sense/belief of me as an explorer who has discovered something. But what it was refering to, the memory of something which happened before, does not need an explorer. It is constructed around this remembering of the past.

asting:
With this sense somehow there is a conviction that without me there will be no tasting. It very feels like me who is tasting.
In that moment of tasting there seems to be a "taster". But can not directly perceive and know him and the "taster" is only an idea.

Is there really you who is tasting ?
Does tasting need you to happen ?

What I noticed today: Actually this sense of me is not around tasting, it is about enjoying and craving for the food: "Wow that's delicious, I want more of that!". But then again the craving and enjoying can also be observed, so there is no really me in there. But need to check this closer.

kind regards