Revisiting the past

[Onlyanegg]

I am sorry to keep living in this fairytale, this waking dream. I don't know what it is....it just feels real. It's a story. It's thoughts. It's nothing. The more I try to grasp it the more it slips away like in a dream. I want to wake up, but at the same time, part of me doesn't want to because it seems like disassociation or even death. The loss of the past. And yet the more I hold on the more it slips away anyway.

What wants to wake up? Can thoughts be awake??? What can die if it never existed? What can disassociate from life, from THIS??? Can thoughts do that? Is this really happening or it "exists" only as a thought content?

Of course I agree, nothing and no-one wants to wake up except in the story of me. Nothing has been disconnected except in the story. And in the absolute sense as talked about in Radical Non-duality, nothing is happening except in thoughts plus sensations in direct experience. Who is even here to grok this. And yet in the story life believes itself to be happening to a real person.

Can an illusion die?

An illusion never existed and therefore can't stop existing. But the one who believes in the illusion keeps believing until there is a moment of epiphany. And a story about not having earned it through trials and tribulations is seen through.

Can a pronoun/a word think/believe it’s the character???? Can a thought believe? Can a thought think? Or the believing is just a thought pattern?

It can't...the thought battern is what is happening though. It's an excuse, also part of the conditioning and the resistance. It's almost as if awakeness is still trying to remain asleep at this point because the words and understanding are all clear.

Another seemingly. It seems there is an expectation of a moment of Oh wow. It was here all along. A subtle shift in perception during which things become clear.

So when you look and see there is nothing there is it not clear that there isn’t anything???

It is clear...It just isn't felt. However most of the time lately I am able to come back to a sense of lightness that may not have been recognized before, even in the dark moments of fatigue or bad moods.

Again what is there to die??

The story. The story has to die I guess.

Is there an entity/a mechanism that is doing the pulling away/resisting? What does “resistance” look like (not feels like)? LOOK! There are sensations there, but are they pulling away something from something/resisting?? Resistance is only a story, an indicative one (revealing false beliefs) but still a story. It's a story how THIS should be different. Can THIS be different than what it is?

The entity doing resistance is thought. Resistance looks like a jumble of thoughts about awakening or not. This can only be what it is. This is all there is.

So how can something that never existed be experienced, yet something that is seen that is not there is understood not to be there but not experienced??? That doesn’t make any sense to me. Do you see the contradiction?

It's like the character in a play believing that it is a real person. The only filter I have to process this information through is the thoughts of being a person, and those thoughts keep arising and falling. No-one says it's not a contradiction, just one that can't easily be reconciled just by wishing it to be so.

Thank You,
Love,
Peter

[poppyseed]

Hi Peter

And yet in the story life believes itself to be happening to a real person.

Is life an entity that can believe? What is “life” in DE and how exactly does it believe stuff? Is there believing at all or just thoughts in sequence that have appeared more times than others???? That smells like Advaita here… Not interested in any stories here, be it spiritual, scientific or everyday ones!!! I want a report of what is actually observed

An illusion never existed and therefore can't stop existing. But the one who believes in the illusion keeps believing until there is a moment of epiphany. And a story about not having earned it through trials and tribulations is seen through

OK… what is the one that believes in illusions? Please provide a description. Is this the character “peter”? How is this character choosing what to believe exactly? Again can a word believe? Can all words believe or only certain ones? Can the word “bottle” believe? I can see how this is a recurring belief, so it’s about time it is checked!

It's almost as if awakeness is still trying to remain asleep at this point because the words and understanding are all clear.

Another fairytale here… What is this “awakeness” that can be asleep or awake? All you are pointing with these words is just more words. So please do tell in a different way what are you pointing to here? Remember the cup of coffee example and use these terms please to describe what you are referring to.

So when you look and see there is nothing there is it not clear that there isn’t anything???

It is clear...It just isn't felt. However most of the time lately I am able to come back to a sense of lightness that may not have been recognized before, even in the dark moments of fatigue or bad moods.

How exactly do you expect it to feel? “Sense of” and “feels like” boil down to sensations, as you‘ve already seen multiple times. So “sense of lightness” is a sensation right? So what makes this sensation linked to “no self” (thinking) in any way without thought content?? What makes certain state (the particular condition that someone or something is in at a specific time) an indicator of an “awakening” – do you see the fairy tale here? Remember cause and effect exist only in thought content. Do you see any arrows pointing from the sensation “lightness” to anything else (what?)? For thoughts to “create” such a sensation, it would mean that thoughts can create any sensation – can you think the sensation “wet feet” right now and experience it in its actual “intensity”?

Let me ask this differently ... is there an actual “lightness” or it’s a new way to describe present sensation (whatever they are) that otherwise would be described as something else (“fatigue” or “bad moods”)? Let me remind you that for certain "emotions" to be seen differently it does not come automatically when it's seen/understood that there is no self and there never was, the different interpretation comes from examining what is here specifically in these situations... Thus, "lightness" is more like a label describing the different interpretation of states, previously considered as problematic, but it does not point to an actual sensation of lightness - it is an important distinction to make even if it looks obvious, when it comes to expectations. This label points the integration of the rest of the beliefs when the core belief of self is busted. If there is still "baggage" that is "heavy" that just shows that it's not seen yet in the light of there was never a self. More looking is needed instead of thinking about awakening and how it should feel like :)

The entity doing resistance is thought. Resistance looks like a jumble of thoughts about awakening or not. This can only be what it is. This is all there is.

Is there an entity “thought”? “Looks like” here refers to mental images right? So let’s see what is actually here? Are there solid thoughts that can jumble together? What is here when it comes to “resistance”? Just thinking (verb), right? No actual “resisting”. There is experiencing and "resistnce" appears only as thinking how the experience should be different than what it is. Do you agree? But can THIS be different than what it is? Is there a choice if it can be this way or another way?

It's like the character in a play believing that it is a real person.

Can a character believe? Can it say or do anything else that what is written in the script? Cna it believe the script? Wouldn't that mean that it can think? Unfortunately, this is as far as this analogy can go! Is there really a character again or just words put together? What makes the words “character”, “peter” or “I” different from the words “box”, “nut”, or ”pencil” in their ability to think and believe? Can the word “I” or “Peter” really think or believe? Does the arrangement of certain words together create a magical potion that somehow gives certain words the ability to believe? Isn't this just more illusion? Isn't believing the illusion of self just another illusion created by language??? For a thought to be believed there is a need of a believer outside of thinking (not a character/thought). A thought cannot think, right? You've said before that there is just thinking happening with no thinker. So is there such an entity as a thinker in any shape or size or not?

The only filter I have to process this information through is the thoughts of being a person, and those thoughts keep arising and falling.

What is this entity that needs a filter to access reality, process information? Mind? Peter? The thinker? Are we going in circles here?

No-one says it's not a contradiction, just one that can't easily be reconciled just by wishing it to be so.

I don’t know what “your” conditioning is but in mine when something is seen as not making any sense it usually is discarded as nonsense… What makes “Santa” different than “Peter”? Or is there a Santa character that is responsible for bringing presents every Christmas? (just checking :) )
Love
Rali

[poppyseed]

Hi Peter

Are we still looking together?
It's been 4 days...
Love
Rali

[Onlyanegg]

And yet in the story life believes itself to be happening to a real person.

Is life an entity that can believe? What is “life” in DE and how exactly does it believe stuff? Is there believing at all or just thoughts in sequence that have appeared more times than others???? That smells like Advaita here… Not interested in any stories here, be it spiritual, scientific or everyday ones!!! I want a report of what is actually observed

In direct experience, it's all just happening in the same way it always was. Life, the struggle, the joys and pains, same as it ever was. Once in a while, like when I'm concentrating on this, I get a glimpse of the actor acting in the cosmic play. But mostly it's just identifying with thoughts about a person who is very real, even though I understand how this can't really be the case.

What is the one that believes in illusions? Please provide a description. Is this the character “peter”? How is this character choosing what to believe exactly? Again can a word believe? Can all words believe or only certain ones? Can the word “bottle” believe? I can see how this is a recurring belief, so it’s about time it is checked!

It's like I can't get out of the character, even though it is seen as a sort of illusion. It's not choosing anything, especially to believe. It just can't stop believing.

Another fairytale here… What is this “awakeness” that can be asleep or awake? All you are pointing with these words is just more words. So please do tell in a different way what are you pointing to here?

Yes, it is a fairytale. Yes, I am using words to point to more words. In direct experience all words point to the same thing. This. Whatever is here at this moment.

How exactly do you expect it to feel? “Sense of” and “feels like” boil down to sensations, as you‘ve already seen multiple times. So “sense of lightness” is a sensation right? So what makes this sensation linked to “no self” (thinking) in any way without thought content?? What makes certain state (the particular condition that someone or something is in at a specific time) an indicator of an “awakening” – do you see the fairy tale here? Remember cause and effect exist only in thought content. Do you see any arrows pointing from the sensation “lightness” to anything else (what?)? For thoughts to “create” such a sensation, it would mean that thoughts can create any sensation – can you think the sensation “wet feet” right now and experience it in its actual “intensity”?

It is mixed for me. I can think of wet feet and imagine what it feels like, but it is all imagination and not direct experience. But even in experience it all feels like a dream sometimes.

is there an actual “lightness” or it’s a new way to describe present sensation (whatever they are) that otherwise would be described as something else (“fatigue” or “bad moods”)?

Just more words blah blah blah, just using words to describe something that can't be described. Or all words point to the same thing ultimately.

Is there an entity “thought”? “Looks like” here refers to mental images right? So let’s see what is actually here? Are there solid thoughts that can jumble together? What is here when it comes to “resistance”? Just thinking (verb), right? No actual “resisting”. There is experiencing and "resistence" appears only as thinking how the experience should be different than what it is. Do you agree? But can THIS be different than what it is? Is there a choice if it can be this way or another way?

Even the resistance, the thoughts are just another happening in this. IT seems clear in thought, but every morning I wake up in confusion and forgetfulness, like I've been dropped into a body with no understanding.

Can a character believe? Can it say or do anything else that what is written in the script? Can it believe the script? Wouldn't that mean that it can think? Unfortunately, this is as far as this analogy can go! Is there really a character again or just words put together? What makes the words “character”, “peter” or “I” different from the words “box”, “nut”, or ”pencil” in their ability to think and believe? Can the word “I” or “Peter” really think or believe? Does the arrangement of certain words together create a magical potion that somehow gives certain words the ability to believe? Isn't this just more illusion? Isn't believing the illusion of self just another illusion created by language??? For a thought to be believed there is a need of a believer outside of thinking (not a character/thought). A thought cannot think, right? You've said before that there is just thinking happening with no thinker. So is there such an entity as a thinker in any shape or size or not?

If the character is just words put together, or just a label, why can't I see outside of it?

What is this entity that needs a filter to access reality, process information? Mind? Peter? The thinker? Are we going in circles here?

Yes, It does feel like I am going in circles mostly, and I will never escape from this.
Sorry for the delay and for answering in bulk.
I am trying to find a new way to express what can't really be expressed, but I feel like I'm failing. But I'm just going to submit anyway so I don't waste more time.
Love
Peter

[poppyseed]

Hi Peter

All your answers show that you are trying to “solve” THIS by thinking not looking.
I want you to LOOK when answer the questions not just spill out whatever has been learned!

But mostly it's just identifying with thoughts about a person who is very real, even though I understand how this can't really be the case.

If the character is just words put together, or just a label, why can't I see outside of it?

What identifies with thoughts??? What is “identifying with thoughts” in DE? What is "believing of thoughts" in DE? Is there a perceiver of experience? What can’t see outside of thoughts? Thoughts??? Thinking is a verb (a happening), there are no solid thoughts that can do anything. Please have a look and describe how is that really happening and is it happening? Don’t guess! LOOK!

Is there a watcher/observer? Are there an observer and thoughts (separate) so he/she/it can identify with them? Or things are happening to nobody, impersonally? LOOK! What is that agency that you are talking about?

There seems to be a continuity of thoughts (the story with a character Peter). How could it be known that it is the story of Peter. Is it told from a third person perspective – Peter did this and that – or is it a generic “I”? Previous thoughts conventionally appear as conditions for subsequent thoughts to arise, but there is no an individual continuum with an essence. Continuity is the appearance of the regularity of conditions (with their labels). Conscious thought (not that there is an unconscious thought) is not an independent faculty that stands to the side making objective observations. Similarly, there are conscious seeing, hearing … which is basically an oxymoron as there is no such thing as unconscious seeing, … to be distinguished from. Thus, the conscious part is indivisible from the experience, not a separate agent with abilities. It is an interdependent characteristic/phenomenon of THIS and therefore equal in importance to the rest of the interdependent phenomena, and similarly non inherently existing. How can this be taken as personal? Is that what you’ve taken for a self?
Look! Can the conscious part be directly observed somehow? Is there a conscious observer or just conscious seeing, hearing, smelling … - conscious experiencing/ THIS? Consciousness/observer is a symbolic description given to an immeasurable complex of diverse activity. There is no substance to be found in its name. Or is there???

Let me give you an analogy to play with…

Imagine for a moment a scene, one of a little mountain stream which is tumbling down a hillside gully, not far from its source. It has been raining and so the level is quite high. See how it flows to the right over a little rock (where, had the level been lower, it would probably have gone around the rock), then the flow goes to the left over a tree bow, and then slows a little in a broader place, before splashing over a small cascade into a pool, and so on down the mountain side.

Does it choose any of its directions? Is it even really a separate entity different from the water deposited in it, the rocks, the depressions in the ground etc? Is it even the same entity moment by moment, or more the product of weather conditions and water, like an ever-changing pattern?

1. Can you find anywhere where "Peter" autonomously intervenes into life, choosing something that is not the product of all the elements; that is not a part of the overall flow?

2. Now please consider a regular decision made eg; what to wear in the morning, or what to eat for lunch, and describe to me what happens. There are environmental factors, there are colour preferences (but where did those come from - any autonomous intervention there perhaps?), practical issues (such as what is available), available time for preparation, purpose (eg; need to fill up for the day, or to look hip and cool for that person!) etc.
Where in there is an autonomous entity intervening in the flow of life? Can you find someone somewhere?

3. Can anything be found for which “Peter" is responsible – if so responsible to what and for what?
Love
Rali

[Onlyanegg]

What identifies with thoughts??? What is “identifying with thoughts” in DE? What is "believing of thoughts" in DE? Is there a perceiver of experience?

Perceiving just seems to happen, just like identifying just happens. Noone is found to identify with.

What can’t see outside of thoughts? Thoughts??? Thinking is a verb (a happening), there are no solid thoughts that can do anything. Please have a look and describe how is that really happening and is it happening? Don’t guess! LOOK!

It would just be more thoughts describing what can't see outside of thoughts. More empty useless words trying to understand.

Is there a watcher/observer? Are there an observer and thoughts (separate) so he/she/it can identify with them?

Also, not seen yet if it exists at all. Just this is seen, sitting here typing.

Or things are happening to nobody, impersonally? LOOK! What is that agency that you are talking about?

I agree with whay you say, it's not personal, it just happens. The perspective here is just a temporal phenomena of a sort.

Is it told from a third person perspective – Peter did this and that – or is it a generic “I”?

Generic, I think, just happens to be the illusion of a person here happening to life itself.

Does it choose any of its directions? Is it even really a separate entity different from the water deposited in it, the rocks, the depressions in the ground etc? Is it even the same entity moment by moment, or more the product of weather conditions and water, like an ever-changing pattern?

Yes, it's life ever changing, filtering itself through this illusion of a person. All the byproduct of what's happening.

1. Can you find anywhere where "Peter" autonomously intervenes into life, choosing something that is not the product of all the elements; that is not a part of the overall flow?

As you say, it's all the product of dependent origination, something that's been happening since the beginning of time, which is also a story. So noone can make a decision, All the thoughts are preprogrammed.
"And yet" it feels so real. Part of the programming is the illusion that one has free will and thet this story is happening to "me". And the story of not being able to get out of one's head is persistent as well.

2. Now please consider a regular decision made eg; what to wear in the morning, or what to eat for lunch, and describe to me what happens. There are environmental factors, there are colour preferences (but where did those come from - any autonomous intervention there perhaps?), practical issues (such as what is available), available time for preparation, purpose (eg; need to fill up for the day, or to look hip and cool for that person!) etc.
Where in there is an autonomous entity intervening in the flow of life? Can you find someone somewhere?

When I decide something, it's always based on what's come before, so there is an unbroken chain of events leading back to the story of childhood and beyond. Color preferences, taste preferences etc. The sense of time, how much or how little is left, all these are out of my control. Everything is out of my control really, as there is just what's happening and no autonomous being doing any choosing.

3. Can anything be found for which “Peter" is responsible – if so responsible to what and for what?

Peter is just an action happening in a chain of never-ending causation. I could drag out these answers as I don't find them satisfactory, however I'm just going to hit submit.

Thank You
Love,
Peter

[poppyseed]

Hi Peter

Perceiving just seems to happen, just like identifying just happens. Noone is found to identify with.

Is there really a “perceiving” and “identifying” in DE? Or just thinking?

It would just be more thoughts describing what can't see outside of thoughts. More empty useless words trying to understand.

Exactly! Until, there is a point of saturation and understanding that this is unsolvable yet still experienceable, aka surrendering to what is…

I agree with whay you say, it's not personal, it just happens. The perspective here is just a temporal phenomena of a sort.

How can it be temporal if time is also a story?

Yes, it's life ever changing, filtering itself through this illusion of a person. All the byproduct of what's happening.

Does life ever change or just its description? Does it change to something else but the senses and thinking, just THIS?

Peter is just an action happening in a chain of never-ending causation. I could drag out these answers as I don't find them satisfactory, however I'm just going to hit submit.

Yes! It will never be satisfactory, because that is the nature of thoughts. They are always out of sync with reality, never getting it right. But just notice, what is underneath thoughts? What is there when you drop the thought I’m not there yet?
Love
Rali

[Onlyanegg]

Is there really a “perceiving” and “identifying” in DE? Or just thinking?

Yes, I see, it can only really be thinking happening, and thoughts about a story of identifying.

It would just be more thoughts describing what can't see outside of thoughts. More empty useless words trying to understand.

Exactly! Until, there is a point of saturation and understanding that this is unsolvable yet still experienceable, aka surrendering to what is…

Point of saturation! Yes...this is more of the story too,about waiting for a point of saturation or an experience to happen.

How can it be temporal if time is also a story?

In the story time happens and things flow sequentially. But it is all just thoughts about time and a dream of being a person trapped in a story.

Does life ever change or just its description? Does it change to something else but the senses and thinking, just THIS?

I can see that that which doesn't change, or begin or end or come and go, is changeless. The thoughts about life constantly change and are helping create this illusion of a life.

Yes! It will never be satisfactory, because that is the nature of thoughts. They are always out of sync with reality, never getting it right. But just notice, what is underneath thoughts? What is there when you drop the thought I’m not there yet?

What can be underneath that which has no over or under....more riddles and paradoxes. How can a thought b dropped if there is no dropper of thoughts. Nowhere to get to either. It is all just more word games to the story of me, and yet trying to see through to the root of it keeps happening.

Thank You
Love
Peter

[poppyseed]

Hi Peter

Yes...this is more of the story too,about waiting for a point of saturation or an experience to happen.

Yup. AKA expectations… Expectations are one of the most frequent blocks to seeing what ‘reality’ actually is. We can blame Guru stories and the attraction to drama in our society for focusing on stories of the initial epiphany that people have as they wake up. In the age of abundance of information, what attracts attention is the “wow” factor. Anything else goes almost unnoticed.

This puts into our head, the idea of “bells and whistles”. We expect big drama to confirm that a significant shift has occurred. For most people the realization comes slowly, quietly, and unnoticeably. Usually “people” that are very much in touch with their emotions react with a “wow” to the realization. For others where “logic” is preferred the realization is like solving a math equation – it just makes sense, when you see what is there. Then some think “I understand it but I don’t feel it”. Do you think that there is a special sensation just for “awakening”? Or is it just that the “understanding” is associated with a sensation that is present at the time? Sensations are present all the time (aliveness) so they can be labelled whatever you want or more like whatever you are conditioned to call them. So that’s why if your conditioning is to see the glass half empty, labels are more on the negative/neutral side.

What can be underneath that which has no over or under....more riddles and paradoxes. How can a thought be dropped if there is no dropper of thoughts. Could be Nowhere to get to either. It is all just more word games to the story of me, and yet trying to see through to the root of it keeps happening.

This could be a perfect example of bypassing. Of course, language is handy when it comes to passing information and this happens without participants. If we have be technical, it is an exchange of thought patterns that belong to nobody. Still, this is how the inquiry has been done. Yes, more stories, but the stories get lighter with it.

So back to the question:

just notice what is underneath thoughts? What is there when you drop the thought I’m not there yet?

What is there when the focus “goes to” senses instead of the thought content (I’m not there yet)? Is there disappointment or frustration? How is all of this experienced without the thought content? What else is there without the labels? Is there anything there that is “not there”, that looks different or doesn’t? What could possibly be different without the labels – there is just sensory “output”? The story is where the difference is, right? The story is where you don’t get it, where you have frustration, etc. Is there anything inherently “frustrating” in the sensations without the label? Or is it just feeling with various intensity – pulsating, vibrating (whatever else you want to call it)? Just stay with the actual experience without the thought. If thought appears replace it with “Bla Bla Bla” (that’s what thought says anyway :) ). Laugh at it, swear at it (whatever feels natural to do). You are not doing it, yet it still happens ;). The mystery of it…
See that the lack of peace is only in thoughts. Explore the sensation “frustration” let it “play out”. Is there an end to it or just the intensity changes? See how the label is applied to what looks like a discrete sensation, isolated just because the intensity has changed suddenly. Forget about the content of thoughts – they have been wrong about everything. Truth is found in everything else. And it’s been there the whole time.
Love
Rali

[Onlyanegg]

Do you think that there is a special sensation just for “awakening”? Or is it just that the “understanding” is associated with a sensation that is present at the time?

If there is no me, or self, there can be no special sensation. BUT.....and I hate to put it like this still, In the story, the waking dream, the illusion of a self that is seemingly only present in thought constructs.....there is a story about a previous awakening that seemed more real than the rest of life. In some way this colored the perception of the whole path thus far. All story, but a persistent one which I wish would fall away or be solved. Various ideas of understanding wax and wane in this thought story as well, with some seeming like a sublime revelation. But at other times it's almost like the depths of hell, so I can see that all states, understandings, and sensations come and go....

just notice what is underneath thoughts? What is there when you drop the thought I’m not there yet?

It's like the saying use the thorn to remove the thorn. Noticing happens when the sense of me directs the sense of attention. It's all more stories about being here or there or anywhere. I wish I could get out of the story.

What is there when the focus “goes to” senses instead of the thought content (I’m not there yet)? Is there disappointment or frustration? How is all of this experienced without the thought content? What else is there without the labels? Is there anything there that is “not there”, that looks different or doesn’t? What could possibly be different without the labels – there is just sensory “output”? The story is where the difference is, right? The story is where you don’t get it, where you have frustration, etc. Is there anything inherently “frustrating” in the sensations without the label? Or is it just feeling with various intensity – pulsating, vibrating (whatever else you want to call it)?

Yes the sensation is in the story. And yet the story keeps happening. It's like the weather. I seem to have no choice but to keep looking and waiting for the cessation of the story. Which is seen as just another story...infinite regression...

See that the lack of peace is only in thoughts. Explore the sensation “frustration” let it “play out”. Is there an end to it or just the intensity changes?

At the moment it is expressing itself as frustration, clinging, stuckness....and it also feels like this "person" is particularly unlucky in this matter of "awakening" as it is just a sort of chance happening with no one to be able to do anything about it.

Thank You
Love
Peter

[poppyseed]

Hi Peter

If there is no me, or self, there can be no special sensation. BUT.....and I hate to put it like this still, In the story, the waking dream, the illusion of a self that is seemingly only present in thought constructs.....there is a story about a previous awakening that seemed more real than the rest of life. In some way this colored the perception of the whole path thus far. All story, but a persistent one which I wish would fall away or be solved. Various ideas of understanding wax and wane in this thought story as well, with some seeming like a sublime revelation. But at other times it's almost like the depths of hell, so I can see that all states, understandings, and sensations come and go....

I keep saying this, but maybe this time it would be comprehended.
This is not about states, this is about everyday stuff. You had a state before that was considered awakening? What happened after that then, if it was the “real deal”? What can possibly be more real than life (not the story of life)? State, according to the dictionary, is “a condition or mode of being as with regards to circumstances”. So how can a state be the real deal if it depends on the circumstances? Does an awakening need the story to drop, or awakening is seeing that there is no one to awaken from the story, that the story is just that - a story/fiction/nonsense?

You keep talking about a “waking dream”. Is this the illusion of a self that you are referring to? How many times does the rope needs to be seen that it is not a snake?

It's like the saying use the thorn to remove the thorn. Noticing happens when the sense of me directs the sense of attention. It's all more stories about being here or there or anywhere. I wish I could get out of the story.

Not really!! Noticing happens when it happens and thought says that an “I” did it.
HAVE A LOOK for that “I” that wants to get out of the story. Is it the same one that is in the story (that the story is about)? How can that happen then?? Can Spiderman get out of the story of Spiderman and decide not be Spiderman anymore :))?

And yet the story keeps happening. It's like the weather. I seem to have no choice but to keep looking and waiting for the cessation of the story. Which is seen as just another story...infinite regression

So give up already ;). The story won’t stop, most likely ever. As long as the story is taken (by itself) as important and true, it will keep spinning more nonsense. When its ridiculousness and absurdity is seen (by itself) then it will play a different tune ;) It is a self-organising thinking at the end of the day

See that the lack of peace is only in thoughts. Explore the sensation “frustration” let it “play out”. Is there an end to it or just the intensity changes?

At the moment it is expressing itself as frustration, clinging, stuckness....and it also feels like this "person" is particularly unlucky in this matter of "awakening" as it is just a sort of chance happening with no one to be able to do anything about it.

Not really! And you didn’t answer the question (did not LOOK)! It is expressing itself as always as an ever changing/fluctuating feeling (not a discrete sensation), and its peaks and troughs are labelled with “frustration”, “clinging”, “stuckness”. I’ve asked before, but maybe one more time… Is there anything “sticky” in the feeling, or “frustrated”, or “clingy”?
So I am not asking of the current story (how feeling is defined as at the moment), I’m asking what is there besides the story…
Love
Rali

[Onlyanegg]

You had a state before that was considered awakening? What happened after that then, if it was the “real deal”? What can possibly be more real than life (not the story of life)? State, according to the dictionary, is “a condition or mode of being as with regards to circumstances”. So how can a state be the real deal if it depends on the circumstances? Does an awakening need the story to drop, or awakening is seeing that there is no one to awaken from the story, that the story is just that - a story/fiction/nonsense?

I see...waiting for the state to change is a trap.They come and go, and "awakening" is more of a state and a story. A fleeting glimpse. I am still looking for a sense of certainty that the states happen for no-one, and yet who could possibly feel that certainty if what you are pointing to is true.

You keep talking about a “waking dream”. Is this the illusion of a self that you are referring to? How many times does the rope needs to be seen that it is not a snake?

When I am talking about the waking dream, I mean more of the sense of daily life as not as real as the story about the sense of clarity that is sometimes experienced during meditation and altered states. But it is all nonsense, just thoughts happening. More often once I tune into whats happpening now, It feels like there is no need for anything else.

HAVE A LOOK for that “I” that wants to get out of the story. Is it the same one that is in the story (that the story is about)? How can that happen then?? Can Spiderman get out of the story of Spiderman and decide not be Spiderman anymore :))?

The I that wants to get out of the story is the same I who is telling the story. I can see that. It's all a story. The fantasy of superheroes works because literally everyone wants to get out of their own story and find relief from the sense of suffering in life.

So give up already ;). The story won’t stop, most likely ever. As long as the story is taken (by itself) as important and true, it will keep spinning more nonsense. When its ridiculousness and absurdity is seen (by itself) then it will play a different tune ;) It is a self-organising thinking at the end of the day

My greatest wish is to be able to give up this struggle. The feeling that there is something incomplete, or unknown...the endless pondering about the meaning of existence and my place in it.
Yet lately there is a sense of bemusement at the whole thing, a kind of seeing and sensing the futility of fighting it. To the extent there can be progress, that's it.

It is expressing itself as always as an ever changing/fluctuating feeling (not a discrete sensation), and its peaks and troughs are labelled with “frustration”, “clinging”, “stuckness”. I’ve asked before, but maybe one more time… Is there anything “sticky” in the feeling, or “frustrated”, or “clingy”?

No "thing" that can cling or be clung too...just thoughts about that. Frustration too is seen through right away as a habit pattern of the self organizing thought stream.

So I am not asking of the current story (how feeling is defined as at the moment), I’m asking what is there besides the story…
Besides the story there is just what is...sometimes referred to as the long time sun, or the ten thousand names. inexpressible.

Thank You for doing so much to help me understand. I really appreciate your time and effort.
Love
Peter

[poppyseed]

Hi Peter

Thank You for doing so much to help me understand. I really appreciate your time and effort.

No need to thank me, it’s my pleasure and benefit too. It’s teaching me patience and different ways to point to the same thing :)

I see...waiting for the state to change is a trap.They come and go, and "awakening" is more of a state and a story. A fleeting glimpse. I am still looking for a sense of certainty that the states happen for no-one, and yet who could possibly feel that certainty if what you are pointing to is true.

What I am pointing to or what you are seeing/not seeing? Well is it true or not? Is there a seeing of an entity? The whole purpose of pointing is for “you” to look and see what reality looks like, not to take my words for it. So do you see any kind of “experiencer of states” in any form, that is different from feeling (aka “body”), thinking (aka “mind”), seeing (aka “observer”), etc.? Make it “your” truth by looking if anything like this exists in any way. And we are not talking about “Spiderman” here… Can you touch, smell, taste, see, or hear “Spiderman” in the book of “Spiderman”? What happened to the characters in your last night dream when you woke up? And what woke up? All we do here is a change in perception, seeing what is real and what is imaginary (aka not existent)

My greatest wish is to be able to give up this struggle. The feeling that there is something incomplete, or unknown...the endless pondering about the meaning of existence and my place in it.
Yet lately there is a sense of bemusement at the whole thing, a kind of seeing and sensing the futility of fighting it. To the extent there can be progress, that's it.

Yes, because it involves a “personal” perspective – your place in the world/reality. Is reality personal? Does it contain a "you"? Is being personal? Is there an owner to being? What is the difference bewteen "reality" and "being" in DE? No you, no need for a place in reality! Simple! It’s just reality with no “you” in it :) Then pondering becomes pointless, as there is no benefit for no one. There is just a description of reality (inaccurate but still …) with no pondering. The more focus goes on the senses the less need to go the story. That is why it’s called DE, there is no need of the description. Is there a listener to that description? What does the description “sound” like? Can you record it and play it out later exactly the same? It's like eating the chocolate instead of thinking of it. Basically, living the life instead of thinking about life :) – more being, less thinking. Once there is an appreciation for the richness of life (chocolate), it’s more difficult to return to imaginary life (ghost chocolate). Focusing on DE is like riding a bike – the more you do it the less thinking about how to do it and actually doing it. And the funny part is that you are not doing it but “you are doing it” at the same time – the illusion. Do you see it? Basically, it’s the same as the pointer what are you responsible for?

Besides the story there is just what is...sometimes referred to as the long time sun, or the ten thousand names. inexpressible.

Exactly! So who needs thinking so badly? And it’s not “Spiderman”…
Can a thought do anything but just be a thought? Can it feel? Can it smell…So how can a thought need anything (e.g. “thinking”)?
Please no bulk answers, answer all questions!
Love
Rali

[Onlyanegg]

What I am pointing to or what you are seeing/not seeing? Well is it true or not? Is there a seeing of an entity?

So far no "entity" has been seen. Seems to be empty where the entity is supposed to reside, the "mind" or being, or even the spirit, all are just concepts, constructs. to help thoughts understand this. Thoughts understanding thoughts about the inexpressible.

So do you see any kind of “experiencer of states” in any form, that is different from feeling (aka “body”), thinking (aka “mind”), seeing (aka “observer”), etc.?

No experiencer, just experience happening, a story unfolding for noone.

Can you touch, smell, taste, see, or hear “Spiderman” in the book of “Spiderman”? What happened to the characters in your last night dream when you woke up? And what woke up?

You can't touch, smell, see or hear Spiderman in the book. He exists only in imagination. And I am realizing that "I" exists only imagination as well. Whose imagination? No-ones

Is reality personal? Does it contain a "you"? Is being personal? Is there an owner to being? What is the difference bewteen "reality" and "being" in DE?

Reality isn't personal. "You" exists only in thought or imagination. But the thought story itself persistently comes through as something real belonging to someone real.

Is there a listener to that description? What does the description “sound” like? Can you record it and play it out later exactly the same?

Focusing on DE is like riding a bike – the more you do it the less thinking about how to do it and actually doing it. And the funny part is that you are not doing it but “you are doing it” at the same time – the illusion. Do you see it? Basically, it’s the same as the pointer what are you responsible for?

Exactly! So who needs thinking so badly? And it’s not “Spiderman”…

Ha....thoughts are just what happens in the meat-bag....for no-one

Can a thought do anything but just be a thought? Can it feel? Can it smell…So how can a thought need anything (e.g. “thinking”)?

A thought is a thought is a thought. It can't feel, smell or need anything. It just keeps happening, maybe echoing.


Thank You
Love, Peter

[poppyseed]

Hi Peter

There is so much clarity in your answers. I really enjoyed reading your last reply!

No experiencer, just experience happening, a story unfolding for noone.

How does that make you feel?

You can't touch, smell, see or hear Spiderman in the book. He exists only in imagination. And I am realizing that "I" exists only imagination as well. Whose imagination? No-ones

Yes!! Only empty thoughts :)

But the thought story itself persistently comes through as something real belonging to someone real.

What makes the story “real”? How is the “realness” of the story experienced exactly? Or is it only “real” because thought says so? Remember any “feels like”/ “seems like” have to be checked!

Ha....thoughts are just what happens in the meat-bag....for no-one

Really?? In a meat-bag? What exactly are you referring to with "meat-bag"? Where do thoughts appear exactly? Inside the “body”?
Love
Rali