Freedom unfettered

[Rube]

Hi Gunnar

At the end of the twenty minutes compare the two ways in which the experience was labelled and answer the following four questions:

1. Is one truer than the other, and If so, which one?

I don't think either are that truthful, I don't think there's deceit, but the task of writing down my experience seemed like an imperfect record of whatever it is I was experiencing, or that it's impossibility to say what really is happening. The second better reflects the experience of the things occurring and the fleeting attention that recognizes and identifies those different things.

2. What is here without labels?

An unsayable reality

3. Do labels affect the experience or just describe it? (Perhaps this highlights what you were experiencing when you wrote: "It feels like an unnatural interruption and the words I use to describe the different ways of experiencing my activities don't correspond naturally to the action")

Labels have a profound effect, they deaden the experience at times, 'that sound is traffic', no longer is there any mystery or curiosity because the label makes it commonplace, or they invite emotional responses if there's a sensation labeled pain, or a scary image that attaches to that pain. Labels seem to both be able to amplify and subdue responses to phenomena.

4. **Did you notice any differences in the body between the two?**

I can't recall too well, no, no major differences.

- Rube

[Rube]

2. What is here without labels?

An unsayable reality

3. Do labels affect the experience or just describe it? (Perhaps this highlights what you were experiencing when you wrote: "It feels like an unnatural interruption and the words I use to describe the different ways of experiencing my activities don't correspond naturally to the action")

Labels have a profound effect, they deaden the experience at times, 'that sound is traffic', no longer is there any mystery or curiosity because the label makes it commonplace, or they invite emotional responses if there's a sensation labeled pain, or a scary image that attaches to that pain. Labels seem to both be able to amplify and subdue responses to phenomena.

4. **Did you notice any differences in the body between the two?**

I can't recall too well, no, no major differences.


Oops, I keep forgetting to format my responses to show quotes. There's not a way of deleting posts are there so that I am not duplicating my replies?

- Rube

[gmalen]

Rube,

Labels have a profound effect, they deaden the experience at times, 'that sound is traffic', no longer is there any mystery or curiosity because the label makes it commonplace, or they invite emotional responses if there's a sensation labeled pain, or a scary image that attaches to that pain. Labels seem to both be able to amplify and subdue responses to phenomena.

Mm. so labels affect the experience OF sound, sight, taste, touch, smell. Do they affect or alter the actual sounds, sights, tastes, sensations, or smells themselves? Please take a moment to look into experience and test it out.

Oops, I keep forgetting to format my responses to show quotes. There's not a way of deleting posts are there so that I am not duplicating my replies?

No big deal. And no, I don't think so.

-----

Okay, I'm appreciating your approach to these inquiries. Very discerning. That will be helpful as we now dive into the sense of self.

I’d like to ask you to explore this SENSE of self very-very thoroughly. Not by thinking about it, but by FEELING it.

Keep the focus of attention on the sense of self and inquire:
Does the sense of self have a real location?
Does the sense of self have a shape or a size?
Does the sense of self say or communicate anything?

If the answer is yes, how does the sense do this exactly?

Does the sense of self have any characteristics or attributes?
What is the sense of self ‘made of’? An image? Sound? Taste? Smell? Sensation? Thought?

In conclusion, is there any self to be found? Remember, it is your direct experience, not whatever feelings and thoughts that come up about it, that we want to get clear about.

Gunn

[Rube]

Labels have a profound effect, they deaden the experience at times, 'that sound is traffic', no longer is there any mystery or curiosity because the label makes it commonplace, or they invite emotional responses if there's a sensation labeled pain, or a scary image that attaches to that pain. Labels seem to both be able to amplify and subdue responses to phenomena.

Mm. so labels affect the experience OF sound, sight, taste, touch, smell. Do they affect or alter the actual sounds, sights, tastes, sensations, or smells themselves? Please take a moment to look into experience and test it out.

Thanks for making the distinction between the psychology of experience and the actuality of experience, if those seem like the right two terms. Labels effect the former, not the latter.

I’d like to ask you to explore this SENSE of self very-very thoroughly. Not by thinking about it, but by FEELING it.

Keep the focus of attention on the sense of self and inquire:
Does the sense of self have a real location?

I can't find a point of origin for the sense of self. There's sensation, I feel the hardness of the stool I am sitting on, but that's simply sensation and associated thought. The sense of self is an elaborate thought.

Does the sense of self have a shape or a size?

No

Does the sense of self say or communicate anything?

Thoughts do

If the answer is yes, how does the sense do this exactly?

Thoughts seems to just come about, I can't say how they do though

Does the sense of self have any characteristics or attributes?

Not in direct experience, I could call upon a mental image of myself whose characteristics I and others might identify it by, but I can't find that in direct experience.

What is the sense of self ‘made of’? An image? Sound? Taste? Smell? Sensation? Thought?

Looking in direct experience there are thoughts, the content of which are like images that compose a self as a perceiver for all that goes on.

In conclusion, is there any self to be found? Remember, it is your direct experience, not whatever feelings and thoughts that come up about it, that we want to get clear about.

I can't find this composed self in direct experience, outside the content of the thought

[gmalen]

Rube,

Thanks for making the distinction between the psychology of experience and the actuality of experience, if those seem like the right two terms. Labels effect the former, not the latter.

:)

Does the sense of self say or communicate anything?
Thoughts do

Are thoughts coming from the sense of self? Look in your actual experience here. Where do thoughts comes from? Wait for the next few and see.

Thoughts seems to just come about, I can't say how they do though

Oh, this kind of answers my inquiries above :p

Does the sense of self have any characteristics or attributes?
Not in direct experience, I could call upon a mental image of myself whose characteristics I and others might identify it by, but I can't find that in direct experience.
What is the sense of self ‘made of’? An image? Sound? Taste? Smell? Sensation? Thought?
Looking in direct experience there are thoughts, the content of which are like images that compose a self as a perceiver for all that goes on.
In conclusion, is there any self to be found? Remember, it is your direct experience, not whatever feelings and thoughts that come up about it, that we want to get clear about.
I can't find this composed self in direct experience, outside the content of the thought

Great looking. The 'I' or 'me' is kind of like a university with all its students, professors, libraries, books, employees, buildings, etc. In direct experience, can you point to the 'university' and find it? Is there some center-point or melting pot of these different aspects that you can touch, see, taste, hear, or smell and say "indeed, this here is the the 'university'"?

What if you took away the students, would it still be a university? What if all that's left is the buildings - still a university then? Is the university in the people, buildings, or books themselves?

Likewise, 'I' is pointing to things in direct experience, mainly sensations and thoughts. That said, is this 'I' label a real entity that you can locate when you look? Can you find this 'I' in the the sensations or thoughts?

Love,
Gunn

-------

[Rube]

What if you took away the students, would it still be a university? What if all that's left is the buildings - still a university then? Is the university in the people, buildings, or books themselves?

Likewise, 'I' is pointing to things in direct experience, mainly sensations and thoughts. That said, is this 'I' label a real entity that you can locate when you look? Can you find this 'I' in the the sensations or thoughts?

Hi Gunnar

What is know here for sure, what is found in direct experience, is an indivisible reality, no boundaries can be found. When a reality consists of parts like those belonging to what we identify with a university, what is then seen is no longer found in direct experience, but consists of the content of thoughts. The I is not real in that it cannot be found in direct experience, it is the content of a thought, there is no separation in experience that can be pointed to.

affectionately, sincerely
Rube

[gmalen]

Rube,

What is know here for sure, what is found in direct experience, is an indivisible reality, no boundaries can be found. When a reality consists of parts like those belonging to what we identify with a university, what is then seen is no longer found in direct experience, but consists of the content of thoughts. The I is not real in that it cannot be found in direct experience, it is the content of a thought, there is no separation in experience that can be pointed to.

How does it feel to see this so clearly? There is no 'you', never has been, never will be. End of story.

Blessings,
Gunnar

[Rube]

How does it feel to see this so clearly? There is no 'you', never has been, never will be. End of story.

Blessings,
Gunnar

Thoughts still occur that run contrary to the idea of no self, they are self-concerned. There is no 'you' and there is something here. To say something about it requires words and words are convincing that they describe what exists. Description requires difference, words are distinct from one another and not indistinct oneness. How can one get past this deception of you and I when using words? The feeling of 'There is no 'you', never has been, never will be. End of story." is that's another story. I would like to go one a bike ride.

[gmalen]

Rube,

Thoughts still occur that run contrary to the idea of no self, they are self-concerned. There is no 'you' and there is something here. To say something about it requires words and words are convincing that they describe what exists. Description requires difference, words are distinct from one another and not indistinct oneness. How can one get past this deception of you and I when using words? The feeling of 'There is no 'you', never has been, never will be. End of story." is that's another story. I would like to go one a bike ride.

Yes, indeed, thoughts can still run contrary. Including the almighty 'but still things just aren't clear (all the time / enough / in this specific way / etc)'. This is simply another thought, but for this one, there's a strong belief in it. Considering the santa claus illusion, even once you wake up to the fact that there is no santa, there still is a man in a red suit with presents taking pictures with kids at the mall. Nothing has changed. NOTHING HAS CHANGED.

Likewise, even when you wake up to the fact that there is no 'you', there still are thoughts, feelings, habits, reactivity, resistance, all of the things of which you took to be 'you' before. The deeper unraveling of real time recognition takes time and continued seeing. The work we are doing here together is simply seeing through the illusion of 'me' so that work can truly begin!

'There is no 'you', never has been, never will be. End of story." is that's another story. I would like to go one a bike ride.

Ahh.. lovely, you're ahead of the game.. ;) Can a thought ever truly touch what is?

Let's continue our exploration:

-----

Palm Flipping Exercise

1. Hold a hand in front of you; palm turned down.

2. Now turn the palm up. And down...and up and so on.

Watch like a hawk.

Don't go to thoughts – examine your direct 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’ of any description 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 and the hand turns over immediately.

Who or what ​ chose which hand - the left or right hand for the exercise?

Can you find a separate individual or anything that is choosing when to turn the palm up or down?

-----

Pz
Gunnar

[Rube]

Hi Gunnar,

Palm Flipping Exercise

1. Hold a hand in front of you; palm turned down.

2. Now turn the palm up. And down...and up and so on.

Watch like a hawk.

Don't go to thoughts – examine your direct experience.

Do this as many times as you like, and each time inquire:

How is the movement controlled?

It comes about of itself. A thought can coincide with it, correspond with it, but I don't see control through thought.

Does a thought control it?

No

Can a ‘controller’ of any description be located?

I don't see any strings being pulled, but there's still a pull to the believability of thoughts.

How is the decision made to turn the hand over?

This seems like a sly question. I don't see decision in direct experience. That there is a decision made that results in the movement is the work of thought. I don't know where thoughts originate.

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

Who or what ​ chose which hand - the left or right hand for the exercise?

Without thinking I chose the left hand, until the question was asked and I realized a selection had been made. I tried to use thinking to turn the hand, but the hand didn't turn. The decision to turn the hand remains a mystery in direct experience.

Can you find a separate individual or anything that is choosing when to turn the palm up or down?

I can't when looking in direct experience.

[gmalen]

Rube,

Great looking. As you continue to discover, there really is no clear answer for all these inquiries and that's okay. It's more a process of seeing what's not there rather than knowing with the mind what is there.

Let's investigate the sense of self as it relates to the body now:

Sit with eyes closed for about 15 minutes.

Paying attention only to the pure sensations, without relying on thoughts or mental images:


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 clothing?

Is there a boundary between the body and the chair?

If you think you find a boundary, how thick is it? 1cm, 1mm, 1 inch? Does it have a color? Does it have a texture?


Is there an inside or an outside?

If there is an inside - the inside of what exactly?

If there is an outside - the outside of what exactly?


What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to?

What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?


Look very carefully, especially with the last question.

Take your time, don’t rush. You can look several times during the day while doing other things (like washing hands, showering, having a short break from work, walking, etc) before replying).

----


Blessings,
Gunnar

[Rube]

Let's investigate the sense of self as it relates to the body now:

Sit with eyes closed for about 15 minutes.

Paying attention only to the pure sensations, without relying on thoughts or mental images:

Hi Gunnar,

Can it be known how tall the body is?

No unit of measurement exists

Does the body have a weight or volume?

as said previously

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

I begun answering the questions and realized a difficulty I am having at the moment. Too easy to answer from an intellectual understanding, to say the words because one cannot say experience. The worry is I've begun taking on the vernacular of this website, it seems too easy to adopt just a new way of speaking, of using words, of saying 'no'. Well, I missed an important point to sit with eyes closed for 15 minutes, I'll try.

No it does not appear as a shape or form

Is there a boundary between the body and the clothing?

No sensation has no boundary, there's pure sensation. Pure I take to mean unadulterated, an absence, clearly there without anything extra.

Is there a boundary between the body and the chair?

Sensation is already saying too much, sensation speaks of awareness not of things but of itself.

If you think you find a boundary, how thick is it? 1cm, 1mm, 1 inch? Does it have a color? Does it have a texture?

Couldn't find one

Is there an inside or an outside?

No. Body and chair, open and closed, light and heavy, these oppositions don't exist

If there is an inside - the inside of what exactly?

Nothing comes to mind

If there is an outside - the outside of what exactly?

Unclear

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to?

Refers to what cannot be referenced. There is a what.

What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

Indistinguishable from the moment

[gmalen]

Rube,

I begun answering the questions and realized a difficulty I am having at the moment. Too easy to answer from an intellectual understanding, to say the words because one cannot say experience. The worry is I've begun taking on the vernacular of this website, it seems too easy to adopt just a new way of speaking, of using words, of saying 'no'. Well, I missed an important point to sit with eyes closed for 15 minutes, I'll try.

Nice catch. Just keep noticing that tendency (it is natural) and returning to direct experience for the answerless answer.

------

Great work with the exercise, let's take this exploration deeper:

Please follow each step, don't leave out any. Take your time. Don't move to the next step until the previous one is clearly seen.

Repeat the exercise several times.

Stand in front of a bigger mirror.

(1) First, close the eyes and feel the sensations labelled ‘body’.

(2) Then open the eyes and look into the mirror while still paying attention to the sensations. Is there any connection between the felt sensations and the image in the mirror? Or just thoughts (and/or mental images) suggest that there is?

(3) While still paying attention to the sensations move one hand and observe the movement from the mirror. Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and image of movement in the mirror?

(4) Now do the same movement with the hand, but this time look at the hand directly, not from the mirror. Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and the image ‘of movement’? Or only thoughts suggest it?

(5) Now, pay attention only to the image in the mirror. Does the image by itself suggest in any way that is ‘you’ or ‘your body’? Does the image itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘body’ at all? Or are there only colours and shapes?

(6) Where the mirror ends, some parts of the body (probably legs) cannot be seen. Just by the image in the mirror, is there any ‘knowledge’ that there must be legs, or only thoughts and mental images suggest so?

(7) Now turn away from the mirror and look forward (don’t look directly to any body parts).

Is there a ‘body’ anywhere when all thoughts and images are ignored, or are there only sensations?

(8) Start to walk slowly.

Is there a ‘body walking’, or are there only sensations?
Is there actual experience of ‘walking’ at all?

Or just THOUGHTS ABOUT ‘walking’?

Can such a thing as ‘body’ be found OR just THOUGHTS ABOUT a ‘body’?

Can such a thing as ‘walking’ be found?

(9) Are the sensations localized in space, like ‘going through the room’; OR is there only an image that is labelled ‘room’ and appearing sensations without any location?

--------

If responds well to both body exercises, can follow up again with these questions:

Great, so did this change your experience of these:

Does the sense of self have a location?

Does the sense of self have a shape or a size?

Does the sense of self say or communicate anything?

If the answer is yes, how does the sense do this exactly?

Does the sense of self have any characteristics or attributes?

What is the sense of self ‘made of’? An image? Sound? Taste? Smell? Sensation? Thought?

What is found?




----

Gunn

[Rube]

Gunnar, could use 2 days to answer these questions. Hope that’s understandable. Thank you

Rube

[gmalen]

Thanks for heads up, sounds good.

G