A gentle kiss on the forehead, for the mind

[ankitawho]

Thank you for the corrections, Rali. I see.

1.

When you touch the can, what does more accurately describe your experience – a. Your fingers feeling cold because of touching a cold can; or b. Coldness - sensation labelled “cold”? With eyes closed, where does the cold appear?

The option (b) is certainly more accurate.
There is a sensation labelled coldness. With eyes closed, its hard to determine the location of the fingers, and only a vague kinesthetical mental image can be visualized of where the fingers might be, so it is not that the fingers feel cold - there are no fingers, it feels like. The sensation appears ???somewhere??? - I dont understand how to explain it. If this wasn't in written, perhaps I would say "a little to the left, a little to the right" to guide you to it. It is not fully localized but it is kind of localised at the point of contact of the hands and the can.

2.

Are there two sensations – one of you bum and one of the chair, or just one sensation labelled “bum on a chair” or just “chair”? Where is the line that separates the sensation from the chair?

Just one sensation, and the label would be "hardness of the chair". There is no line of separation, just one sensation.

Is the sensation separate from sensing?

I might not be understanding this question fully, but there is no one "sensing" anything. There is just the sensation.

Gratitude
Ankita

[poppyseed]

Hi Ankita
Good LOOKING!

its hard to determine the location of the fingers, and only a vague kinesthetical mental image can be visualized of where the fingers might be, so it is not that the fingers feel cold - there are no fingers, it feels like. The sensation appears ???somewhere??? - I dont understand how to explain it. If this wasn't in written, perhaps I would say "a little to the left, a little to the right" to guide you to it. It is not fully localized but it is kind of localised at the point of contact of the hands and the can.

So, is there a “location” for sensations or is it just a label for them (e.g., sensation called “warm left hand”)? Is it sensation that gives them ‘shape’ or thought? For a location to exist there is a need for a reference point/a center. Is there such center? Please describe it.

Is the sensation separate from sensing?

I might not be understanding this question fully, but there is no one "sensing" anything. There is just the sensation.

Are there solid sensation floating around? You see how language creates subjects and objects out of thin air, where there is only a constant flow happening (more like verbs). Is there sensing and sensation, or just sensing? Is there a border that marks where the sensing of sensation stops and the sensation start?
Let’s repeat the exercise again:
Sit comfortably on a chair. Close your eyes and relax. Pay attention only to the feeling of your body. Just notice the pure sensations, without relying on thoughts or mental images. Keep your eyes closed and look:
Can it be known how tall the body is?
Does the body have a weight or volume?
In the actual experience does the body have a shape or a form?
Is there a boundary between the body and the chair? At the point where your body contacts the chair, are there two things there, a body and chair, or one, sensation?
Is it "my" body, or is it just a body?
What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to? What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?
Can the 'body' do things?

Look very carefully, especially with the last question. You can look several times during the day while doing other things (like washing hands, showering, walking, lying down, etc) before replying.
Love
Rali

[ankitawho]

Dear Rali

So, is there a “location” for sensations or is it just a label for them (e.g., sensation called “warm left hand”)?

The sensations do seem to be localized, not by body part but at a general direction/area. A label such as "warm left hand" doesn't feel so accurate, maybe something more like "a warm sensation to the right of my point of view".

For a location to exist there is a need for a reference point/a center. Is there such center? Please describe it.

I spent quite a bit of time with this. Truthfully, the center seems to be behind the eyes. This "point of view" seems to be the zero mark and the sensation is to the its right.

Is it sensation that gives them ‘shape’ or thought?

What does "them" refer to here?

Are there solid sensation floating around?

No

Is there sensing and sensation, or just sensing? Is there a border that marks where the sensing of sensation stops and the sensation start?

Aah, I understand this now. There is no border. Sensing and sensation seem to be the same thing. This resolves a lot. I see that my perception was indeed that there are, well, not solid sensations floating around, but "heavier" flows of whatever it is that flows normally. But with this understanding, the localization of sensations (localization of sensing!) also appears to dissolve.
What was happening up until now was that when told to LOOK at a sensation, my attention would be turned to the sensation while maintaining that the looking is happening from somewhere behind the eyes. It seems now that the looking is not happening from the eyes or behind the eyes at all. There's just looking.
A headache appears on "looking" like this. It is a little overwhelming and makes it hard to keep looking, forces to go back to the perception that the looking is happening from somewhere behind the eyes.
Please consider the answers typed before this question in the light of this new seeing. While typing this answer, everything else written feels extremely inaccurate... Maybe I should answer them again:

So, is there a “location” for sensations or is it just a label for them (e.g., sensation called “warm left hand”)?

There is no location of the sensations/sensing.
The heaviness/sensation behind the eyes that makes it seem like it is the zero point too is only a sensation - one that has been practised and identified with for too long. If it is looked upon for its reality - just a sensation, then the location of no other sensing makes any sense!!! I was locating all other sensations by considering this to be the center!!! This is the mistaken "I"! (?????)

...Writing this makes many more sensations arise.

------------------------
The exercise:

Can it be known how tall the body is?

No

Does the body have a weight or volume?

No

In the actual experience does the body have a shape or a form?

No

Is there a boundary between the body and the chair? At the point where your body contacts the chair, are there two things there, a body and chair, or one, sensation?

There is just one sensation.

Is it "my" body, or is it just a body?

Makes me giggle. It is just a body.
It is just a body!!!

Theres a sensation of giddiness immediately followed by panic.

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to? What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

The word/label 'body' refers to this HEAVY sensation behind the eyes - that is only and simply a sensation.
The actual experience of the body seems to be nothing at all - no more than the experience of this bed or this wall. Just sensations.

------------

Sorry that the answers are a little all over the place.

Gratitude
Ankita

[poppyseed]

Hi Ankita

What was happening up until now was that when told to LOOK at a sensation, my attention would be turned to the sensation while maintaining that the looking is happening from somewhere behind the eyes. It seems now that the looking is not happening from the eyes or behind the eyes at all. There's just looking.
A headache appears on "looking" like this. It is a little overwhelming and makes it hard to keep looking, forces to go back to the perception that the looking is happening from somewhere behind the eyes.

You see you are used to associating two sensations – the one behind your eyes and any other sensations as linked, while in DE it can be seen, that all there is, is sensing. LOOK, is there such a link between them? What does it look like? Thought labels different “fragments” of sensing as separate things and “builds” relationships between them. Do you how limited thinking is at describing what is happening?

Theres a sensation of giddiness immediately followed by panic.

As you saw, “body” is a very complex label describing colours, sensations, tastes, etc. You can see how the illusion of “I” is supported through this label. Once you have a ‘body’ it’s not that far to have an owner of the body. So ask again, is there an owner of the body, is there a center to which sensations are happening? Whenever fear or resistance appears, it is an invitation for a deeper exploration. Fear protects the imaginary “I” from harm, so obviously when old beliefs are challenged there will be a resistance. New thoughts/descriptions come and they either stick to them (fit with the old beliefs like puzzle pieces) or not – what we call confirmation bias. Confirmation bias saves time and energy so it’s often applied, but with DE we see what is really happening and that challenges all beliefs that have been taken for truth for a very long time. So check, is there a need for that protection, is there an ‘I’ with a ‘body’ that needs to be protected? Please let me know, if that fear is an obstacle to our further exploration and we need to clear it up first.
You skipped a question:

Can the 'body' do things?

Please answer so we can move on.
Love
Rali

[ankitawho]

Hi Rali

LOOK, is there such a link between them? What does it look like?

There is no link between them. They are not 2 sensations but just sensing.

Thought labels different “fragments” of sensing as separate things and “builds” relationships between them.

I see..

Do you how limited thinking is at describing what is happening?

Yes..

So ask again, is there an owner of the body, is there a center to which sensations are happening?

There is no owner, no body and no center to which sensations are happening.

So check, is there a need for that protection, is there an ‘I’ with a ‘body’ that needs to be protected?

There is no 'I' with a 'body' that needs protection.

Please let me know, if that fear is an obstacle to our further exploration and we need to clear it up first.

Fear does not seem to be an obstacle, but sensations do keep arising every once in a while during this exploration..

Can the 'body' do things?

There is no 'body'. With this seeing, its hard to understand the meaning of 'doing' too..


Thank you for the beautiful guidance thus far :)
Ankita

[poppyseed]

Hi Ankita

Fear does not seem to be an obstacle, but sensations do keep arising every once in a while during this exploration..

Feelings/emotions are sensations with a thought. Fear just shows thought content that hasn’t been examined yet. Its role is just to point to stuff that needs to be checked. Look closer. Is the story that comes with it true? The key to emotions is being able to allow the sensations all the room they need without pushing them aside or wanting them to be different. Once there is no resistance (there is surrendering) to a sensation/feeling, then it transforms.

For the next exercise I want you to sit somewhere quiet and observe thoughts.
A thought appears. In that moment is there anyone or anything which recognises the thought or is being aware of it? Can you see anything that is separate from the thought and does the thinking? Where do thoughts appear from? Do they appear randomly or in a structured way? Is there anything that is responsible for the thoughts like a traffic cop saying which one to go and which one to stay? Can the flow of thoughts be changed? Watch like a hawk.
Write down a sequence of 5 thoughts in the order that they appear. Now check:
Could you predict the order of their appearance? Did you know which will be the second or the fourth? Can you stop them midway? How long does that last? Test it for the fun of exploration. Are they 100% true?
What are you, when you don't think about what you are?
Love
Rali

[ankitawho]

Dear Rali

Feelings/emotions are sensations with a thought.

Yes, I see..

Is the story that comes with it true?

No! It is just a thought.

-----

In that moment is there anyone or anything which recognises the thought or is being aware of it?

There is no one and nothing which recognises the thought or is being aware of it. There is just recognition of it..

Can you see anything that is separate from the thought and does the thinking?

No.

Where do thoughts appear from?

I do not really know and cannot really see.. They seem to appear out of nowhere.

Do they appear randomly or in a structured way?

Very randomly.

Is there anything that is responsible for the thoughts like a traffic cop saying which one to go and which one to stay?

No, there is not.

Can the flow of thoughts be changed?

Not really. Sometimes "watching" them seems to influence them.. makes them disappear momentarily.

Write down a sequence of 5 thoughts in the order that they appear.

- Why does my head hurt
- How can I do xyz
- What thoughts should I list
- Thoughts about a song playing in the background
- Thoughts about the movie the song was in

Could you predict the order of their appearance?

No.

Did you know which will be the second or the fourth?

Absolutely not

Can you stop them midway?

No... They seem to happen instantaneously, time-lessly. They mostly come in one whole chunk, not separable bits.

How long does that last?

Sometimes when a thought is expressed in a sentence, stopping it midway seems to work ... not for very long at all.

Are they 100% true?

No. I have previously done Byron Katie's "The Work" and seen them be very untrue.

What are you, when you don't think about what you are?

I don't really know... Just a field of vision...

Thanks always.
Ankita

[poppyseed]

Hi Ankita
Very good looking!

What are you, when you don't think about what you are?

I don't really know... Just a field of vision...

What do you mean by a field of vision? Please describe it a bit more. Are you awareness? What does awareness look like? Does it speak etc – how can you describe it using the five senses? Are you doing the noticing of thought? Is awareness prior to, or is it arising together with, the objects that it is being aware of (e.g. thoughts)? Can there be awareness without objects? Is it personal? Can the noticing be separated from experience? Are there two – noticing and experience (e.g. thinking) or just one noticing_thinking_etc (THIS)?

Focus on the feeling of am-ness/being, aliveness.
Can you tell if there is a being or just being?
Is life happening to a being or as being?
Please LOOK, don’t intellectualise, imagine or remember from your previous experience!
Allow the questions to work their magic :)

Love
Rali

[ankitawho]

Hi Rali

What do you mean by a field of vision?

On looking, I seem to be a big vast field in which everything is happening. There are images ("seeing"), there is sensation ("sensing"), and other direct experiencing: "hearing", "tasting", "smelling", "thinking", which merges into one single, inseparable DE. There is something more: a strange ability to focus or defocus in a way that starts to make "happenings" appear separable.
When not looking, all of this seems to go down in a drain. Then, I see to be a conglomerate of biological processes with thoughts.

Are you awareness?

Never truly "saw" what awareness is.
There is indeed awareness of the happenings: of the one big direct experience experienced as 6 different direct experiences. But am I this? How can I see that? There seems to be nothing more fundamental so I must be it..

What does awareness look like?

This question does things to "me"..
I don't know what awareness looks like. But maybe something can be said about how it feels... It feels expansive. vast. alive.

Does it speak etc – how can you describe it using the five senses?

No... it doesn't speak.
It seems to be that in which the five senses sense. I do not see any sense sensing it.

Are you doing the noticing of thought?

Absolutely no clue...
To be completely honest with you and myself, I'm not sure I understand fully what we call thought and what we don't. Sometimes thought is just a voice silently reading out loud the words being typed, sometimes it becomes a dictation of the words that must be typed while simultaneously reading them, sometimes its whole mental images, sometimes memories....
Sometimes it seems that a thought can be deliberately thought of... other times it just arises.

So when you ask if I'm doing the noticing of thought.. well there is no boundary between the thought and any noticer. Thoughts are just noticed. Who is doing it? Not sure
Why are they noticed sometimes and not other times? Not sure

Is awareness prior to, or is it arising together with, the objects that it is being aware of (e.g. thoughts)?

It is prior to the objects that it is being aware of. The objects are sometimes absent - for example the absence of sound, or silence, is still within awareness. The absence of thoughts too is within awareness.

Can there be awareness without objects?

!!! I do not know how it would be experienced as, but there must be awareness without objects...
This question was deeply invigorating.

Is it personal?

ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!

Can the noticing be separated from experience?

We have reached the end of my seeing capability it seems haha!
It doesn't appear to me that noticing can be separated from experience...

Are there two – noticing and experience (e.g. thinking) or just one noticing_thinking_etc (THIS)?

just one noticing_thinking (THIS!!!).....
once again i repeat i dont fully understand what all comprises a thought, and to me, noticing also sometimes feels like a thought. other times it doesn't.

Can you tell if there is a being or just being?

There is just being. Absolutely, clearly.

Is life happening to a being or as being?

Life is happening as being.


Gratitude
Ankita

[poppyseed]

Hi Ankita
There are a lot of unchecked beliefs in your answer. Phrases like “seems like” and “feels like” always suggest thought content. Nothing in DE is “seems like” – it’s either there or not.

On looking, I seem to be a big vast field in which everything is happening. There are images ("seeing"), there is sensation ("sensing"), and other direct experiencing: "hearing", "tasting", "smelling", "thinking", which merges into one single, inseparable DE. There is something more: a strange ability to focus or defocus in a way that starts to make "happenings" appear separable.
When not looking, all of this seems to go down in a drain. Then, I see to be a conglomerate of biological processes with thoughts.

So is awareness a container for separate/solid experiences(e.g. images, sensations)? You said that life happens as being, not to a being. That implies a flux, a flow. But is that a flow of things or just flowing/experiencing? What is “vast”? Is there space in DE, or just seeing? Is there “here” or “there”, “far” or “close”, “tiny” or “vast” in DE or just seeing? Does seeing disappear when you close your eyes? When I close my eyes I still see reddish light.

Never truly "saw" what awareness is.
There is indeed awareness of the happenings: of the one big direct experience experienced as 6 different direct experiences. But am I this? How can I see that? There seems to be nothing more fundamental so I must be it..

Have you ever seen an unicorn? Do you think unicorns exist? What makes an awareness different from an unicorn? Are you looking for a replacement for the "I"? So if you are not the separate self than you are the BIG SELF - awareness? You said awareness is not personal, what makes it you then? You said that life happens as a being not to a being, so is there really a need for entity in any form?

To be completely honest with you and myself, I'm not sure I understand fully what we call thought and what we don't.

Well, thought is everything else that is not seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, and sensing. Please, look at the exercise at the bottom!

Sometimes thought is just a voice silently reading out loud the words being typed, sometimes it becomes a dictation of the words that must be typed while simultaneously reading them, sometimes its whole mental images, sometimes memories....
Sometimes it seems that a thought can be deliberately thought of... other times it just arises.

Yes. It’s all of that.

So when you ask if I'm doing the noticing of thought.. well there is no boundary between the thought and any noticer. Thoughts are just noticed. Who is doing it? Not sure
Why are they noticed sometimes and not other times? Not sure

Yes, noticing cannot be separated from thinking, seeing, hearing, smelling, sensing, and tasting. And yes, there are no separate senses but one experiencing. It’s what’s happening/THIS. Is there anything outside of noticing_experiencing (THIS) without thought content?

It is prior to the objects that it is being aware of. The objects are sometimes absent - for example the absence of sound, or silence, is still within awareness. The absence of thoughts too is within awareness.

Really?? Is there separate awareness for the different senses? Is there any moment when there is awareness of nothing (no hearing, seeing, tasting, smelling, thinking, nor sensing)? Not even aliveness – sensing “heart beats” or “breathing”? Again, are the senses separate without thought content that describes them as that?

Can there be awareness without objects?

!!! I do not know how it would be experienced as, but there must be awareness without objects...
This question was deeply invigorating.

Why? Because thought says so?? We are here to challenge all beliefs through LOOKING. So can there be awareness without objects? How is that seen/experienced? How is it observed with the senses? Everything that cannot be described with the senses is a belief, right?

Please watch this video, it might bring some more clarity:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Lm3G0_ ... 4&index=15

Just to make the distinction between thought and the other senses perfectly clear…
I hope you like chocolate (but if you don’t replace it with anything else that you have handy and you like)
For the first couple of minutes imagine you are eating a piece chocolate…feel the sensations of it melting into your mouth, the taste, the texture, the aroma. Really enjoy the imaginary piece of chocolate as much as you can.

Then for the next couple of minutes actually have a piece of chocolate and see the difference.
Experience the chocolate with curiosity and observe the sensations. Really enjoy it.
Then for another minute or so describe the experience in as much detail as possible.
Write the description here. What was the experience like?
After you have done this, tell me what you noticed when you compared these three experiences:
1. Imaginary piece of chocolate
2. Real piece of chocolate
3. Description of eating the real piece of chocolate

Love
Rali

[ankitawho]

Dear Rali
Thank you for the wonderful questions. I see the unchecked beliefs.

So is awareness a container for separate/solid experiences(e.g. images, sensations)?

In direct experience, awareness is not different from experiencing. There is no container, no awareness, no separate solid experiences. Just experiencing.

You said that life happens as being, not to a being. That implies a flux, a flow.

Flux and flow of what?

But is that a flow of things or just flowing/experiencing?

There is no flowing... no flow of things and no flowing.
There is just experiencing.

What is “vast”?

I see the error. Thank you for pointing it out.

Is there space in DE, or just seeing?

Just seeing. No space.

Is there “here” or “there”, “far” or “close”, “tiny” or “vast” in DE or just seeing?

There is just seeing.

Does seeing disappear when you close your eyes?

No, it doesn't.

Have you ever seen an unicorn?

No

Do you think unicorns exist?

No

What makes an awareness different from an unicorn?

Indeed nothing. Awareness is as real/unreal as a unicorn in direct experience.

Are you looking for a replacement for the "I"?

I see that this indeed was the attempt.

So if you are not the separate self than you are the BIG SELF - awareness?

.......wow........
Yup... yup. You got me. The BIG SELF - awareness is indeed where "I" went to hide :)
Thank you.
I am not the separate self, and I am not the BIG SELF - the awareness. There is still no "I".

You said awareness is not personal, what makes it you then?

:)
I see the fallacy.

You said that life happens as a being not to a being, so is there really a need for entity in any form?

There is no need for an entity in any form.

Is there anything outside of noticing_experiencing (THIS) without thought content?

There is not.

Is there separate awareness for the different senses?

Aaah... No there is not.

Is there any moment when there is awareness of nothing (no hearing, seeing, tasting, smelling, thinking, nor sensing)?

No

Again, are the senses separate without thought content that describes them as that?

They are indeed not...
They are one big sensing/experiencing.

Why? Because thought says so??

Yes, that was completely thought based.

So can there be awareness without objects?

There are no objects... No awareness. Just experiencing.

How is that seen/experienced?

???????
I don't see/understand.

How is it observed with the senses?

It is not, and so there is no awareness. Just experiencing.

Everything that cannot be described with the senses is a belief, right?

Yes.

Please watch this video, it might bring some more clarity:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Lm3G0_ ... 4&index=15

Clears up a LOT. Thanks for recommending, Rali :)

Please allow me some time to do the chocolate exercise.

Gratitude
Ankita

[ankitawho]

The chocolate exercise:

I hope you like chocolate

I do!

Write the description here. What was the experience like?

Having a piece of actual chocolate involves seeing the shape of it, the nuts embedded on it, hearing the snap when it breaks off, seeing little bits of it falling, tasting (sensing) the cocoa, feeling (sensing) it go down the throat, all the while smelling its chocolate-y aroma. It leaves a little bit of it behind on your fingers, melted... The experience includes feeling that stickiness.

After you have done this, tell me what you noticed when you compared these three experiences:
1. Imaginary piece of chocolate
2. Real piece of chocolate
3. Description of eating the real piece of chocolate

1. The imaginary piece of chocolate, in my direct experience, constitutes mostly just thought - but it does include almost smelling it(sensing). There is no boundary between the thought and the almost smelling of it. The thought content is mostly anticipatory and centred around how it might feel to have it, and how it can be actually acquired ("It's in the drawer... can get it now..")

2. Having the real piece of chocolate is seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and sensing.... and thinking (Thought content like "Shouldve unwrapped it better, its getting messy"/ "This is quite more-ish, too sweet").

3. Description of eating the real piece of chocolate is once again all thought (Thought content: remembering what it was like to eat the chocolate), and some sensation (fingers typing words on the keyboard).

The primary confusion to me is that even thought is seen as THE experience... inseparable from other senses (that are also inseparable from each other). When thought is separated from THE experience, isnt that done by thought too..?
I see experience as all of it...sometimes there are thoughts and sometimes there are not.

Can the noticing be separated from experience? Are there two – noticing and experience (e.g. thinking) or just one noticing_thinking_etc (THIS)?

Again, are the senses separate without thought content that describes them as that?

^ Senses are not separate without thought content that describes them as that... But thought is also not separate from the senses. It is all just experienced as one.

I hope this makes sense..

Thanks,
Ankita

[poppyseed]

Hi Ankita
Very good!!

Flux and flow of what?

There is no flowing... no flow of things and no flowing.
There is just experiencing.

Flow/flux is meant to describe the whole vibrancy/dynamism of experiencing , never the same (more like verbs than nouns). There is just undivided experiencing (THIS).

The primary confusion to me is that even thought is seen as THE experience... inseparable from other senses (that are also inseparable from each other). When thought is separated from THE experience, isnt that done by thought too..?

Well spotted!!! Now that we’ve made thought the "bad guy", there are thoughts coming to describe how thoughts are appearing and not being accurate, but at the end of the day thinking is also THIS :). Thinking cannot be separated from DE – it is only in thought content that is possible. Remember, the only thing that is changed with this inquiry is perception (thought content) to describe more accurately what is happening, even though as you are seeing, THIS cannot be grasped by thoughts. It does not need to be understood by the intellect. Actually, it is impossible to understand through thoughts. It is inconceivable, ungraspable. And yet, it can be directly seen. There is an old saying in Zen: “In the beginning, mountains are mountains and rivers are rivers; later on, mountains are not mountains and rivers are not rivers; and still later, mountains are mountains and rivers are rivers.” :) What do you think it means?

I see experience as all of it...sometimes there are thoughts and sometimes there are not.

Amazing! Right?!
Let’s have a look at the idea of control, choice and decisions. Please explore the three exercises below and report your findings

1. Hold a hand in front of you; palm turned down. Now turn the palm up. And down...and up and so on.
2. Put two objects that you like in front of you (e.g. a cup of coffee and a glass of juice), then pick up one or the other, while paying attention to the whole process of choosing.
Watch like a hawk. Don't go to thoughts, examine the actual experience. Do this as many times as you like, and each time inquire…
How is the movement controlled?
Does a thought control it?
Can a ‘controller’ or and entity that is choosing be located?
How is the decision made to turn the hand over? Track any decision point when a thought MADE THE DECISION to turn the hand over.

3. Can you take me through a biggish decision that you made recently - not something very personal so you share more details about it? How did it come to be? Consider all of the conditions that were necessary for it to happen. If any one of those conditions were different, would the outcome have been the same? How many of these conditions were outside of your influence? What was in your control (according to thought)?
Please give me some details about your decision making...

Love
Rali

[ankitawho]

Hi Rali

Flow/flux is meant to describe the whole vibrancy/dynamism of experiencing , never the same (more like verbs than nouns).

Gotcha

There is an old saying in Zen: “In the beginning, mountains are mountains and rivers are rivers; later on, mountains are not mountains and rivers are not rivers; and still later, mountains are mountains and rivers are rivers.” :) What do you think it means?

Maybe it means that in the beginning, thinking separates mountains from rivers and so there are mountains that are mountains and rivers that are rivers; later on, when seen through the thought-separation, mountains are no longer mountains and rivers are no longer rivers...they just are. I don't understand the last part, but maybe it means that once the reality is seen, one goes back to nonchalantly being okay with even the thought-separation, and being okay with thoughts that see mountains as mountains and rivers as rivers.

Exercises:

How is the movement controlled?

Absolutely no clue

Does a thought control it?

Absolutely not

Can a ‘controller’ or and entity that is choosing be located?

No

How is the decision made to turn the hand over?

I am really not able to "see" anything about decision making

Track any decision point when a thought MADE THE DECISION to turn the hand over.

There is no such point

Can you take me through a biggish decision that you made recently - not something very personal so you share more details about it?

Please allow me some time to think about this. There is no such decision that immediately comes to the mind.

Gratitude
Ankita

[poppyseed]

Hi Ankita
Awesome!!!

I don't understand the last part, but maybe it means that once the reality is seen, one goes back to nonchalantly being okay with even the thought-separation, and being okay with thoughts that see mountains as mountains and rivers as rivers.

Yes!! Before you start the inquiry, you see mountains and rivers as objects, then during the inquiry you see them for what they truly are without thought content, and at the end of the inquiry, life continues to be the same as before – you still use labels but their true nature is known to be empty of intrinsic meaning.

Track any decision point when a thought MADE THE DECISION to turn the hand over.

There is no such point

Yes. The thought “I decided to turn the hand” comes as a description to what is already happening.
Here is a video that you might find interesting:
https://vimeo.com/90101368?fbclid=IwAR3

Please allow me some time to think about this. There is no such decision that immediately comes to the mind.

It doesn’t have to be a big one – it could be how you decided to buy something. The whole point is to track the “decision making” process
Love
Rali