END OF SEEKING

[poppyseed]

Hi Angelos

There is not "decision making" . All the time I was trying to decide clearly I couldn't do it. The conditions were making the decision obvious!

Very good observation!

From actual experience I look that there is not cause and effect. The causes that I am writing this sentenece at this moment are infinite. Yeah one thought can say that there is one cause for one effect but I see it clearly as illusion.

It lies even deeper than this – at the base of cause and effect there are concepts. Thought isolates “something”, labels it, and “observes” and makes logical conclusions about how it is related to other “somethings”, where concepts are empty/fiction ("apple" example). Even if the “observations” are logical and “true” it is presupposed that this “something” really exists.

No I cannot experience "past" or "future" because the thoughts/memories/projection about them happen NOW. I had an insight: that Ι cannot specify exactly the NOW!!!!!!! Where is the now closed in one minute or in one second?. You can devide infinetely!!So the NOW is infinite!!! Also I cannot define in the "timeline" the exact exact moment I felt conscious!!!When my birth happened exaclty? In the moment of my conception? In the first breath? When my head was out of the womb?

These are all perfect example of stories/memories/fiction that come along the DE. Some of them are proper fiction, like for example can you even directly experience being born or this is just a story/assumption about a character that has been born and will die? We observe “others” "being born" and we assume we had to be too. Is there a starting point for noticing/being in DE? Or ALL just happens NOW with memories/thoughts of a past?

No there is a continuous experience. The line of time is thought arising in DE.

Is it really continuous if there is no “time”? Do you see here how thought starts to crumble in its ability to describe reality…? Truth or reality is not an idea or a belief. It 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.

At this point, it will be a good DE exercise to get out for an actual walk in nature and observe interconnectedness. See how ALL is moving interdependently, including thinking and the senses. Hold these questions in mind:
Is there anything that is separate from everything else?
Is there a border that divides “me” and “my body” from everything else, or is it just a thought? Is that interdependent movement outside of you? Is there an “inside” and an “outside”?
Is there an owner of being?
Are there others? Is there an “I” in others?
Is there a “you”?

Love
Rali

[Bonan]

Hi Rali,

It lies even deeper than this – at the base of cause and effect there are concepts. Thought isolates “something”, labels it, and “observes” and makes logical conclusions about how it is related to other “somethings”, where concepts are empty/fiction ("apple" example). Even if the “observations” are logical and “true” it is presupposed that this “something” really exists.

Indeed!It's true this from the actual experience!

These are all perfect example of stories/memories/fiction that come along the DE. Some of them are proper fiction, like for example can you even directly experience being born or this is just a story/assumption about a character that has been born and will die? We observe “others” "being born" and we assume we had to be too. Is there a starting point for noticing/being in DE? Or ALL just happens NOW with memories/thoughts of a past?

The second is the case . All just happens NOW with memories/thoughts odf a past. And I cannot dirrctly experience being born....

Is it really continuous if there is no “time”? Do you see here how thought starts to crumble in its ability to describe reality…? Truth or reality is not an idea or a belief. It 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.

Ok I can see that game from the part of the thought. "Continuity" implies "time"

At this point, it will be a good DE exercise to get out for an actual walk in nature and observe interconnectedness. See how ALL is moving interdependently, including thinking and the senses. Hold these questions in mind:
Is there anything that is separate from everything else?
Is there a border that divides “me” and “my body” from everything else, or is it just a thought? Is that interdependent movement outside of you? Is there an “inside” and an “outside”?
Is there an owner of being?
Are there others? Is there an “I” in others?
Is there a “you”?

In Greece we have 40o C degrees so I went to the sea :)

There's not something seperate . There's not clear where the sand ends and the sea begins.
Without thoughts that create isolation there's no division.
There's not the interdependent movement outside of me.Every movement was inside the DE . Seeing the people who were swimming. This movement was appearing with seeing together.
I cannot define the outside.There's not "inside" and "outside". There's only NOW.
Only the thought says that there is an owner of being. It's just the thought not the truth.
There are not others in DE, only sounds,images . I cannot directly experience an "I" in others.
The "you" is thoughts arising (ladel) as the "I". No difference........

Thanks,

Angelos

[poppyseed]

Hi Angelos
Beautiful answers!

Only the thought says that there is an owner of being. It's just the thought not the truth.
There are not others in DE, only sounds,images . I cannot directly experience an "I" in others.
The "you" is thoughts arising (ladel) as the "I". No difference........

Yes!!! Exactly! Different colours in seeing create the illusion of things but all that is there is seeing. Different levels of sounds create the illusion of a song but all that is there is hearing.
Look at the picture:

Are there many colours? Or is there simply colour?
Is there an actual gap between the ‘people’? Or is the gap actually colour?
Where does colour begin and end? In other words, can an actual dividing line be found between where one colour ends and another begins, or is that just a mental construct?

What has changed and what hasn’t in normal everyday living. What changes? What stays the same?
What is the biggest difference from before starting this conversation?
Is seeking still going on?
Is there any confusion at all or anything you would like to address?
Can you say with a big fat YES, it is clear what the illusion of a separate self is?

Love
Rali

[Bonan]

Hi Rali,

Have a nice week!

Image
Are there many colours? Or is there simply colour?
Is there an actual gap between the ‘people’? Or is the gap actually colour?
Where does colour begin and end? In other words, can an actual dividing line be found between where one colour ends and another begins, or is that just a mental construct

There is simply colour. There is not clear for example when the red ens and orange begins.
The gap is actually colour.
No ALL colours is ONE colour. There's not actual dividing line.
The differences on colour are mental consrtuct (also without light there are not colours).

What has changed and what hasn’t in normal everyday living. What changes? What stays the same?
What is the biggest difference from before starting this conversation?
Is seeking still going on?
Is there any confusion at all or anything you would like to address?
Can you say with a big fat YES, it is clear what the illusion of a separate self is?

First of all a great relief has happened. The false assumptions that I had adopted from childhood dont look real any more. So it doesn't need to protect my "I" and all anxiety followed by this!Oufff!!!!It doesn't need to go to Thibet or to practice many hours of meditation or to read desperately the books without other hobbies because "enlightement" is waiting to seek. I learnt with simple ways to look directly the Truth. No, I don't seek any more. Seeking or grasping are thoughts function and I am not identified with them.

I am ok. There's not any confusion. There's only awareness.
YES I can say YES. It's clear what the illussion of a seperate self is.

So, I don't know if there's anything else needed to happen. Ι don't buy of course the expectations of the mind.
But I am happy if things are so simple.

Thanks,

Angelos

[poppyseed]

Hi Angelos

First of all a great relief has happened. The false assumptions that I had adopted from childhood dont look real any more. So it doesn't need to protect my "I" and all anxiety followed by this!Oufff!!!!It doesn't need to go to Thibet or to practice many hours of meditation or to read desperately the books without other hobbies because "enlightement" is waiting to seek. I learnt with simple ways to look directly the Truth. No, I don't seek any more. Seeking or grasping are thoughts function and I am not identified with them.

Amazing, isn't it?! Very good!

The differences on colour are mental consrtuct (also without light there are not colours).

What is “light” in DE? How is it different from “colour” in DE?

I am ok. There's not any confusion. There's only awareness.

What is awareness? Is it a container for experiences? Some kind of lone witness? Or is witnessing too just happening, done by no one? Is awareness a container in which all arises?
In your actual direct experience (DE), is there an entity Awareness? What does it look like – form/colour; does it speak etc – how can you describe it using the five senses? Is there awareness or “aware-ing”/knowing/being?
Now let’s LOOK even deeper… where does awareness stop and its object (thinking, seeing…) start, is there a visible border? Are there ”solid” thoughts floating around in “awareness”- “arising, appearing and disappearing”? Are the thinker/awareness, thought, and thinking separate? Can there be awareness without objects? Can there be objects without awareness? Is awareness ever actually experienced or is it just an idea, an abstraction?
Please LOOK, don’t intellectualise, imagine or remember from your previous experience! Keep digging!

Love
Rali

[Bonan]

Hi Rali ,

What is “light” in DE? How is it different from “colour” in DE?

In DE "light" is not different from "colour" . Labels, Thoughts arising/description!

What is awareness? Is it a container for experiences? Some kind of lone witness? Or is witnessing too just happening, done by no one? Is awareness a container in which all arises?
In your actual direct experience (DE), is there an entity Awareness? What does it look like – form/colour; does it speak etc – how can you describe it using the five senses? Is there awareness or “aware-ing”/knowing/being?

Looking deeper only a thought cay say that awareness is "container for experience" or "lone witness"! Witnessing too just happening, done by no one. Awareness is not container, is the looking_being....
No my actual direct experience there's not an entity awareness. I cannot decribe it with five senses or with thoughts. There is "aware-ing"/knowing/being.

Now let’s LOOK even deeper… where does awareness stop and its object (thinking, seeing…) start, is there a visible border? Are there ”solid” thoughts floating around in “awareness”- “arising, appearing and disappearing”? Are the thinker/awareness, thought, and thinking separate? Can there be awareness without objects? Can there be objects without awareness? Is awareness ever actually experienced or is it just an idea, an abstraction?

No there is not a visible border between awareness and its object! No there is not such a thing "solid" thoughts , there is not floating neither "arising,appearins and disappearing. There is awareness_thinking_thought. The awareness cannot be without objects and objects without awareness. In reality awareness cannot actually be experienced . It is just an idea........

Love,

Angelos

[poppyseed]

Hi Angelos

Great!!!!

No there is not a visible border between awareness and its object! No there is not such a thing "solid" thoughts , there is not floating neither "arising,appearins and disappearing. There is awareness_thinking_thought. The awareness cannot be without objects and objects without awareness. In reality awareness cannot actually be experienced . It is just an idea........

Yes!! But LOOK! It’s not just knowing_thinking and knowing_seeing, etc. It is actually knowing_seeing_tasting_feeling_smelling_hearing_thinking or just THIS/whole/life/what IS, whatever you want to call it. In reality, there is only existence, whatever is happening right now. There are no parts, no fragments. Existence is not like a jigsaw puzzle with millions of billions of pieces. There are no pieces at all, there is only existence / life / what IS, which is whole. Can you see that? You might find this video interesting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Lm3G0_ ... ex=18&t=8s

So, I don't know if there's anything else needed to happen. Ι don't buy of course the expectations of the mind.
But I am happy if things are so simple.

"Crossing the gate" is only a beginning, not an end. The Gate is a tiny first step, a very important one, but not a final one by any means. Nothing changed, but everything looks different. The recognition of no self is just the beginning of seeing life and “yourself” in a new light. It takes time to clean up all the "mess", to settle in and adjust. All that conditioning did not create itself in a day so it will also take some time to be seen through. This video might be helpful:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJQcD588g2w

Is there anything else that you want to explore together?
We have some traditional final questions. Would you like to answer those?
Love
Rali

[Bonan]

Hi Rali,

Yes!! But LOOK! It’s not just knowing_thinking and knowing_seeing, etc. It is actually knowing_seeing_tasting_feeling_smelling_hearing_thinking or just THIS/whole/life/what IS, whatever you want to call it. In reality, there is only existence, whatever is happening right now. There are no parts, no fragments. Existence is nt ot like a jigsaw puzzle with millions of billions of pieces. There are no pieces at all, there is only existence / life / what IS, which is whole. Can you see that? You might find this video interesting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Lm3G0_ ... ex=18&t=8s

Yes I can see that there is knowing_seeing_tasting_feeling_smelling_hearing_thinking and there is only existence,consciousness, God. The name doesn't matter.......

As fas as the video, I find all these language games meaningless . Consciousness = What is = Existence = Being. Which is the problem to use this phrase? Someone can use it as the "bubble" and someone else as "what is". Nisargadatta or Maharsi didn' t ask for people to follow them and didn't speak for bubbles(this is misunderstanding). Mind is the divider not the Consciousness.The video confuses the mind with consciousness. And yes these gurus made the consciousness as identity in the first place but in the end teached that we should drop this identity too. Sorry I don't think that what she says is different from the teachers.

"Crossing the gate" is only a beginning, not an end. The Gate is a tiny first step, a very important one, but not a final one by any means. Nothing changed, but everything looks different. The recognition of no self is just the beginning of seeing life and “yourself” in a new light. It takes time to clean up all the "mess", to settle in and adjust. All that conditioning did not create itself in a day so it will also take some time to be seen through. This video might be helpful:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJQcD588g2w

Is there anything else that you want to explore together?
We have some traditional final questions. Would you like to answer those?

From where does this knowing_aliveness_being come from?

Thanks,

Angelos

[poppyseed]

Hi Angelos

Yes I can see that there is knowing_seeing_tasting_feeling_smelling_hearing_thinking and there is only existence,consciousness, God. The name doesn't matter.......

As fas as the video, I find all these language games meaningless . Consciousness = What is = Existence = Being. Which is the problem to use this phrase? Someone can use it as the "bubble" and someone else as "what is". Nisargadatta or Maharsi didn' t ask for people to follow them and didn't speak for bubbles(this is misunderstanding). Mind is the divider not the Consciousness.The video confuses the mind with consciousness. And yes these gurus made the consciousness as identity in the first place but in the end teached that we should drop this identity too. Sorry I don't think that what she says is different from the teachers.

I can see some resistance here :))). If it does not matter what you call THIS why are you getting “upset”/"defensive" about labels and teachers? Fear and resistance work together as a protective mechanism, a signal to not go somewhere unknown, unsafe, or dark. But, in experience, this signal is only a sensation triggered by thoughts. Resistance is actually a very useful tool to see what esle (beliefs) needs to be explored and seen for what it is.
Thoughts are symbols, labels; they form descriptions and interpretations of experience. Thoughts that are believed create tension and resistance as well as clinging and attachments. The key is to notice resistance. Just notice that there is something that resists something. If you sense frustration and tension, locate them in the body. Don’t try to change anything, just notice.

The meaning of a word is not the word itself but is found within what is meant by the unit of language. It is easy to get stuck on concepts and believe that they are telling the truth, but none of them are truth, they are only carriers. It’s easy to look at the finger that points to the moon and assume that the finger itself is where focus should go. If you get hooked on looking at the finger, you can discuss the finger, debate about it, argue about it, and even create a following, but the moon is not there. The moon is located where the finger is pointing to. You can miss and forget the pointing entirely if all you can see is the pointing tool. “Mind”, “Consciousness” are just labels overlayed on top what is happening.
Tathātā is a Buddhist term variously translated as "thusness" or "suchness," referring to the nature of reality free from conceptual elaborations and the subject–object distinction. Because everything is dependently originated, nothing has any self-nature or essence. All labels are empty/fiction. When there is attachment to labels, that needs to be explored. There are beliefs that need to be seen for what they are. Is there a reason for that attachment? Would THIS change somehow without the beliefs?
So are you going to tell me that you are consciousness in which everything appears, or something like that? Brahman? Ultimate Bliss? Light? Love? Energy? Emptiness? The ether? I’m sorry to be so blunt, but these are just concepts and that is why we ask people to leave teachings behind. Would you be here if they have worked?? They take you to a certain place and then you have to let go of all of them and see for yourself what IS.

From where does this knowing_aliveness_being come from?

Do you really need to know? Is it possible to know? Do they have to come from somewhere and then go somewhere else? Do you see how absurd this all sounds? It just IS! What does want to know? Thoughts? If you can’t “see” the answer then you replace it with a belief. Why try and believe anything? Just keep your eyes open. No gurus, beliefs, etc. are needed for that. Just notice what is ‘underneath’ all thoughts. Thoughts add an overlaying narrative of names, labels, interpretations, explanations over the simplicity of what is. Instead of endlessly reaching for ideas, concepts and explanations, just let it all go, and see. Just see what is here now silently, without words. Just notice what is left when you stop thinking about it. Just relish the not knowing!

Truth or reality is not an idea or a belief. It 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.

Seeing is wordless, and immediate. The taste of chocolate is immediately and silently (wordlessly) known, since it is not conceptual. As soon as the label ‘taste of chocolate’ is added, the immediacy of experience is veiled by conceptualization. Any form of description is an abstraction, which is added after the immediate experience.
Is that clear?
Love
Rali

[Bonan]

Hi Rali,

I can see some resistance here :))). If it does not matter what you call THIS why are you getting “upset”/"defensive" about labels and teachers? Fear and resistance work together as a protective mechanism, a signal to not go somewhere unknown, unsafe, or dark. But, in experience, this signal is only a sensation triggered by thoughts. Resistance is actually a very useful tool to see what esle (beliefs) needs to be explored and seen for what it is.
Thoughts are symbols, labels; they form descriptions and interpretations of experience. Thoughts that are believed create tension and resistance as well as clinging and attachments. The key is to notice resistance. Just notice that there is something that resists something. If you sense frustration and tension, locate them in the body. Don’t try to change anything, just notice.

Of course there is resistance. I can regognize it in my "throat" and under my heart. I am not sure what I am trying to defend but I'll keep notice.

The meaning of a word is not the word itself but is found within what is meant by the unit of language. It is easy to get stuck on concepts and believe that they are telling the truth, but none of them are truth, they are only carriers. It’s easy to look at the finger that points to the moon and assume that the finger itself is where focus should go. If you get hooked on looking at the finger, you can discuss the finger, debate about it, argue about it, and even create a following, but the moon is not there. The moon is located where the finger is pointing to. You can miss and forget the pointing entirely if all you can see is the pointing tool. “Mind”, “Consciousness” are just labels overlayed on top what is happening.
Tathātā is a Buddhist term variously translated as "thusness" or "suchness," referring to the nature of reality free from conceptual elaborations and the subject–object distinction. Because everything is dependently originated, nothing has any self-nature or essence. All labels are empty/fiction. When there is attachment to labels, that needs to be explored. There are beliefs that need to be seen for what they are. Is there a reason for that attachment? Would THIS change somehow without the beliefs?

OK it's clear

So are you going to tell me that you are consciousness in which everything appears, or something like that? Brahman? Ultimate Bliss? Light? Love? Energy? Emptiness? The ether? I’m sorry to be so blunt, but these are just concepts and that is why we ask people to leave teachings behind. Would you be here if they have worked?? They take you to a certain place and then you have to let go of all of them and see for yourself what IS.

No of course I don't tell this thing, there's not "you" and "I". The "you" and "I" presuppose the seperate self. I can tell that there is only everything,consciousness,wholeness,aliveness,being,isness,thusness,suchness

Do you really need to know? Is it possible to know? Do they have to come from somewhere and then go somewhere else? Do you see how absurd this all sounds? It just IS! What does want to know? Thoughts? If you can’t “see” the answer then you replace it with a belief. Why try and believe anything? Just keep your eyes open. No gurus, beliefs, etc. are needed for that. Just notice what is ‘underneath’ all thoughts. Thoughts add an overlaying narrative of names, labels, interpretations, explanations over the simplicity of what is. Instead of endlessly reaching for ideas, concepts and explanations, just let it all go, and see. Just see what is here now silently, without words. Just notice what is left when you stop thinking about it. Just relish the not knowing!

Yes indeed the more sincere answer I can give is that I DON'T KNOW. It's the mystery!

Truth or reality is not an idea or a belief. It 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.

Yes I have tried so much to grasp it , so "seeking energy". I am done . All this effort leads me to stop the effort. There is not something to grasp and it's ok

Seeing is wordless, and immediate. The taste of chocolate is immediately and silently (wordlessly) known, since it is not conceptual. As soon as the label ‘taste of chocolate’ is added, the immediacy of experience is veiled by conceptualization. Any form of description is an abstraction, which is added after the immediate experience.
Is that clear?

Yes it's clear!

So from this guidance I looked that there is no other effort to happen or something super special to realize. For my part I am totally ok with this! So I will take my time to clean up the "mess"

Thank you,

Angelos

[poppyseed]

Hi Angelos

Of course there is resistance. I can regognize it in my "throat" and under my heart. I am not sure what I am trying to defend but I'll keep notice.

LOOK! That’s important! Are you sure that the "little self" is not trying to replace/mask itself with a big one (Self)? Remember, resistance serves to protect the imaginary self from harm. It is a thought and sensations. It usually arises with a story of should’s and should-not’s.

Some thought sequences come almost inseparable because they’ve been fired together for a long time - what we call beliefs. New thoughts that appear either stick to them (fit with the beliefs like puzzle pieces) or not – what we call confirmation bias. Conformation bias saves time and energy with discarding new ideas that do not fit with the rest. DE, though, checks with the senses what truly is happening. It might seem that it involves effort but it is just happening on its own – effortless effort.
BUT is the story actually important? Does it somehow change the experience? Can thoughts do anything but describe (accurately or not) what is happening?
Also, are Nisargadatta or Maharsi's experiences somehow more special then yours? How would you know that? What are "Nisargadatta" and "Maharshi" in DE? Also a fun fact, they both didn't want to talk about their experience and teach because they knew that the moment they try to talk about it is lost - like the difference between eating a chocolate and imagining eating one :)

No of course I don't tell this thing, there's not "you" and "I". The "you" and "I" presuppose the seperate self.

By “take you to a certain place” I mean “thought”. Thought eventually syncs with the DE when all beliefs are checked in DE (by no one :) ). Talking non-dually is very hard (impossible) and that is why we still use language with pronouns and nouns even when the illusion is seen. That is the difference between an illusion and a delusion - when the empty nature of language is seen through and it is used as a useful tool.

If you can say with a big fat YES, that it is clear what the illusion of a separate self is, we have some traditional final questions. Would you like to answer those?
Love
Rali

[poppyseed]

Hi Angelos

Is everything OK?
Love
Rali

[Bonan]

Hi Rali,

I was on 4-day journey! I forgot to let you know!

LOOK! That’s important! Are you sure that the "little self" is not trying to replace/mask itself with a big one (Self)? Remember, resistance serves to protect the imaginary self from harm. It is a thought and sensations. It usually arises with a story of should’s and should-not’s.

Some thought sequences come almost inseparable because they’ve been fired together for a long time - what we call beliefs. New thoughts that appear either stick to them (fit with the beliefs like puzzle pieces) or not – what we call confirmation bias. Conformation bias saves time and energy with discarding new ideas that do not fit with the rest. DE, though, checks with the senses what truly is happening. It might seem that it involves effort but it is just happening on its own – effortless effort.
BUT is the story actually important? Does it somehow change the experience? Can thoughts do anything but describe (accurately or not) what is happening?
Also, are Nisargadatta or Maharsi's experiences somehow more special then yours? How would you know that? What are "Nisargadatta" and "Maharshi" in DE? Also a fun fact, they both didn't want to talk about their experience and teach because they knew that the moment they try to talk about it is lost - like the difference between eating a chocolate and imagining eating one :)

Yes I can look clearly that the experiences of "others" (gurus,family,friends,therapists,teachers,coaches) are not more special than mine! No the story is not important and doesn't change the actual experience . Of course thoughts describe the world but there are not the real deal. Yes I see this trying from the part of the "little self" but in my real life i don't show superiority or something like this. I recognize "myself" equally with anything else. I needed this to clean this shit for me and thank you for your support in this.

If you can say with a big fat YES, that it is clear what the illusion of a separate self is, we have some traditional final questions. Would you like to answer those?

YES I CAN SAY WITH A BIG FAT YES that it is clear what the illusion of a separate self is!!! I am fine as the things but if this would help somewhere then I can answer them.

Love,

Angelos

[poppyseed]

Hi Angelos

I was on 4-day journey! I forgot to let you know!

It’s OK, life happens :)
I’m glad you are OK!

YES I CAN SAY WITH A BIG FAT YES that it is clear what the illusion of a separate self is!!! I am fine as the things but if this would help somewhere then I can answer them.

Here are the final questions. Please answer all questions in full, when you are ready. Please answer what's true for you rather than any sort of 'ideal' answer
1) Is there a separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form? Was there ever?

2) Explain in detail what the illusion of separate self is, when it starts and how it works from your own experience. Describe it fully as you see it now.

3) How does it feel to see this? What is the difference from before you started this dialogue? Please report from the past few days.

4) What was the last bit that pushed you over, made you look?

5) Describe decision & give examples from experience.

Describe intention & give examples from experience.

Describe free will & give examples from experience.

Describe choice & give examples from experience.

Describe control & give examples from experience.

What makes things happen? How does it work?

What are you responsible for? Give examples from experience.

6) Anything to add?
Love
Rali

[Bonan]

Hi Rali,

1) Is there a separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form? Was there ever?

No in actual expereince no self is found anywhere! The case "was" this ever.

2) Explain in detail what the illusion of separate self is, when it starts and how it works from your own experience. Describe it fully as you see it now.

The illusion of seperate self is identification with a thought "me" or thoughts/sensations of a "body" or with a label of "emotion". The illusion of the seperate self is that you are an entity who moves in the time . The "time" is the illusion inside the illusion. The illusion of separate self is when there is distinction between a subject from object and an observer from the observed. The illusion of seperate self is concepts or stories about who I am and these stories become believed. It starts form childhood when we hear a personal name and recognize the body as something seperate from actual experience as "our body". This illusion works with stories. The story that there's a chooser that makes choices, a decision maker that makes decisions, a doerr that does things. These come from the initial illusion of the seperate self (me/world).

3)How does it feel to see this? What is the difference from before you started this dialogue? Please report from the past few days.

It feels like cosmic joke. It feels so obvious now that there's not seperate self that makes me wonder how i couldn't see it so many years. I feel so ecstatic from the power of conditioning. If we could "take time" to simply look this simple thing we would have saved so much suffering in the planet. It doesn't feel so transformative, I don't see fireworks but I feel that its the base I need for living life. I feel that this realization will deepen more while cleaning the shit. The difference from before I started was that I was reading the one spiritual book behind the other or I was so anxious about the technique I will. Now I am not in this situation and I am not waiting desperatelt something to happen. Through your exercices I made the realization that there is awareness_noticing_tasting_sensing_hearing_seeing_smelling and it is what is all the time or NOW and "attention" = isolation.

4) What was the last bit that pushed you over, made you look?

The intellectualization! I looked that thoughts made so much effort to explain this process. I realized that as many as thoughts are, they remain simply just thoughts and one thought reflects to another thought and all of this was making me leave from what is if I was lost in this! There was not a controller behind the thoughts. Building from thoughts was happening by iteslf. So where is the "me"?

5) Describe decision & give examples from experience.

Describe intention & give examples from experience.

Describe free will & give examples from experience.

Describe choice & give examples from experience.

Describe control & give examples from experience.

What makes things happen? How does it work?

What are you responsible for? Give examples from experience.

Decision happens by itself

I decided to eat banana. I didn't make the decision. It was appeared by itself.
I decided to cook rice. I didn't make the decision. It was appeared by itself.

Intention happens by itself

I was intended to call a friend. I didn't make the intention. It was appeared by itself.
I was intended to watch a video about animals. It was appeared by itself.

Free will is no so free :).

I had the will to buy one book. "I" didn't do something for this will.
I had the will to clean my office now. "I" didn't do something for this will.

Choice happens by itself

I chose to write this text now. I didn't make the decision. It was appeared by itself
I chose to feed the cats in afternoon . I didn't make the decision. It was appeared by itself.

There is no control at all

I didn't control the time I waked up.
I didn't control the moment I wanted to go to the bathroom.

Nothing makes things happen! The things just happen by themselves! The things just work by themselves!

There's not a "me" that is responsible for something. There's simply responsibility.

"I" was not responsible for the thought to take the car today.
"I" was not responsible for the low energy of my body.

6) Anything to add?

I suppose that in our career is necessary to use labels but we must remember that they are illusion......

Thanks,

Angelos