Looking for a guide

[warissem]

Good evening

There is no "I" in direct experience, then on whose behalf do they arise? I guess another way to look at it is that they arise just like thoughts do, they may imply an "I" but that doesn't mean there is one.

Yes, great to see this. The "I" is just a thought among thoughts.

I am grateful for this question. I have been looking for the sensation labelled "discomfort". I can't find it yet there is some sense of subtle "not okayness". It's not a feeling I can pinpoint and objectify. I wonder if it's just a thought that strongly says "Now is not ok".

It could be only a thought or a sensation + thought. The goal is to take away concepts, labels and mental images from what is here now in direct experience.

Without concepts added on them, all sensations are neutral, they have no color.

Waiting for your answers to the other questions of my last post.

Best for you

[Bhn1618]

The previous post was cut short for some reason, so I will write the remainder again

What if the label “discomfort” is taken away from the sensation. Look at the sensation without adding a label on it and tell me what is found.

I have also been looking for the peace that the "discomfort" is blocking. I am asking throughout the day "What needs to be added/subtracted from direct experience right now for peace?". There are lots of feelings of shame and sadness that thought say need to be subtracted however they are not always there yet there is no peace. At the same time there are thoughts of pleasurable euphoric sensations however it is clear those also come and go so they can't be the basis for peace either.

The seeking is just happening and I have no idea why.
All seeking means finding.

What do you expect to find? Give a list of all the expectations. Some expectations are apparent, others may be hidden.

Expectation of resilience/equanimity with any difficulty.
Expectation of no more procrastination as there will be no more shame.
Expectation that there will no more resistance to negative emotions so they will dissolve and I will be at peace.
Expectation to no longer feel so overwhelmed with managing and planning life.
Expectation of no more fear of judgement.
Expectation of no more fear of planning life correctly and fear of getting it wrong.
Expectation that actions will no arise out of fear and there will be a sense of being supported/abundance.
Basically life will flow with equanimity and I will be able to accept whatever "good" or "bad" happens instead of being overwhelmed by it.
Expectation that there will be less confusion as to how to proceed and more ability to notice what intuition is saying and follow it.

In my experience it seems that the "seeker" points to body and thoughts appearing in direct experience. The thoughts are not seen/heard/tasted/smelt/felt. The body is made up of sensations and seeing. Without thought or mental images it's all just flowing experiences one after the next.

Do you see clearly that without thoughts and mental images there is no “I”, no seeker, no separate self managing life?

Without thoughts or mental images there is just experiencing in the form of seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, smelling, mental thinking, and mental imaging flowing. Without any memory thinking keeps happening and some of those thoughts are followed by other experiencing but there is not enough memory to build a manager of thoughts or separate "I". There is no "I" found in experience.
It is clear when looked at but somehow the noticing of this doesn't stay and the implications of it don't settle in experience. If there is no I why is there so much concern still there for it?

Is the seeking for peace a direct experience? I can't clearly find it in direct experience, the best I can describe is like a yearning possibly a discomfort in the body sensations and thoughts appearing saying "I'm not at peace".

Yes, are thoughts saying truth?
Do thoughts know what is peace or unease?

Thoughts can't feel so they at best point to other experiences. Thoughts have an expectation of peace where there is comfort/bravery no matter what is happening in experience. Unease is a sensation in the body that is labelled "unease" and "not good". I have been trying to direct attention (in a sense the direction of attention isn't my doing it's just an effect of being guided by you) to any "unease" body sensation however attention slides back into thoughts automatically.

Intellectually this is accepted that there is peace now however it's not believed enough to keep attention here.

There is no need for a belief, there is just being here now and you cannot be otherwise, do you see this?

There is only here, now however I can't define "here" or "now". It cannot be otherwise. All memory that appears distracts from the other senses however it is also just appearing here and now and then the here now switches back to the senses on it's own.
On this reflection fear is arising about lack of control. Thoughts are arising saying "but how will I fix XYZ without control". These are also arising here and now.

Thoughts arise in the now doubting or they arise proposing certain actions that can be taken in the future which then pull attention away. There's a sense of fear with not entertaining thoughts about planning about the future despite many years of dissatisfaction with the outcome.

Are you really entertaining thoughts or do they arise by themselves? Look again.

They are arising by themselves, implying that they will/will not be entertained and proposing "bad" outcomes if not. There doesn't appear to be control when looked at directly.

There's fear that if thoughts weren't listened to things would have been worse. I can see this is all thoughts arising yet there's confusion.

Who would be the "I" to do anything about it?
Look at the “I” and give answer to the question.

Looking for the "I" in direct experience yields no answer. Even the fear thoughts are implying there is an "I" that can do something about it. This is clear yet these thoughts are persistently arising. Usually once something is understood thoughts about it dissipate.

Experience is the field of the five senses + thoughts about the field. Experience and thoughts are arising here now. Being aware = seeing = hearing = smelling = tasting = feeling sensations = thinking.

So experience isn't trapped, experience is the senses + thinking. Experience is not separate from the senses so it can't be trapped by them. Experience does not have any borders, the experience of thinking presents mental images or ideas of borders which are also appearing in experience followed by the believing of them.
What is the difference between thoughts happening that are not believed and thoughts happening that are believed?

[warissem]

Good evening

You are doing a great job here. There is a lot of stuff in your post. I will give my comments tomorrow in the evening. Meanwhile you continue to look at what is here without labeling : seeing without labeling what is seen, hearing without labeling what is heard, etc ...

Best wishes

[warissem]

Good evening

I have also been looking for the peace that the "discomfort" is blocking.

Is there a sensation called “discomfort”?
Can a sensation block something or let something to be?

I am asking throughout the day "What needs to be added/subtracted from direct experience right now for peace?". There are lots of feelings of shame and sadness that thought say need to be subtracted however they are not always there yet there is no peace. At the same time there are thoughts of pleasurable euphoric sensations however it is clear those also come and go so they can't be the basis for peace either.

Shame, sadness, pleasure are labels given for sensations. Instead of stopping the looking at the level of labels, go behind them and look for the raw sensations. Be curious about sadness : which sensations are expressing this? Do the same for shame, pleasure, fear, …

Thanks for listing your expectations. Some of them are realistic, others are not. Just leave them aside during our dialog. Be like a new born, no expectation.

There is no "I" found in experience.

Is it a seeing in direct experience or just a thought arising?

It is clear when looked at but somehow the noticing of this doesn't stay and the implications of it don't settle in experience. If there is no I why is there so much concern still there for it?

We are not arguing about the existence of the “I”, I invite you to look at the “I” and describe it for me.

Thoughts can't feel so they at best point to other experiences.

Yes, good.

Thoughts have an expectation of peace where there is comfort/bravery no matter what is happening in experience.

Do you see that what you said is a train of thoughts, with no link with direct experience?

Unease is a sensation in the body that is labelled "unease" and "not good".

Yes, great to see this and to split apart the sensation from the label.

I have been trying to direct attention (in a sense the direction of attention isn't my doing it's just an effect of being guided by you) to any "unease" body sensation however attention slides back into thoughts automatically.

Is there a problem with thoughts? The key is that : thought does not know anything about what is here now. It is just a thought. Don’t give credit to thoughts. They are like clouds passing by.

There is only here, now however I can't define "here" or "now". It cannot be otherwise. All memory that appears distracts from the other senses however it is also just appearing here and now and then the here now switches back to the senses on it's own.

Here now means where you are in this very moment. The attention goes to the senses appearances as it goes to thoughts. Look at the senses appearances and tell me if there is you, a separate self as an appearance?

On this reflection fear is arising about lack of control. Thoughts are arising saying "but how will I fix XYZ without control". These are also arising here and now.

Yes thoughts are arising, is there an I willing to fix something or “I will fix XYZ” is just a thought ?

They are arising by themselves, implying that they will/will not be entertained and proposing "bad" outcomes if not. There doesn't appear to be control when looked at directly.

Do you see that what is said above is a train of thoughts?

Looking for the "I" in direct experience yields no answer. Even the fear thoughts are implying there is an "I" that can do something about it. This is clear yet these thoughts are persistently arising. Usually once something is understood thoughts about it dissipate.

As I said above, the clue is to give no credit to thoughts, they are unsentient, empty like pots.

So experience isn't trapped, experience is the senses + thinking. Experience is not separate from the senses so it can't be trapped by them. Experience does not have any borders, the experience of thinking presents mental images or ideas of borders which are also appearing in experience followed by the believing of them.

Yes, good observation.

What is the difference between thoughts happening that are not believed and thoughts happening that are believed?

Belief itself is a thought reinforcing other thoughts, do you see this?

Best for you

[Bhn1618]

Ok so what I'm understanding is that thoughts have no connect to what is appearing in the senses except that they also occur here and now.
The thoughts are completely blind to all sensory experience and have no connection to them at all?
If this is the case how are they consistent in that when a the shape of a mug appears in vision the label in thought is always "mug". If thoughts are completely blind to the senses how are they consistent? This has been a point of confusion for a long time.

I have also been looking for the peace that the "discomfort" is blocking.

Is there a sensation called “discomfort”?
Can a sensation block something or let something to be?

There is no one sensation called discomfort, it's just a label just like the label for apple has many different appearances.
I never considered if a sensation can block something. In a sense a painful sensation can block an action but can it block peace? I don't know. Can a sensation let something be? If we speak of eternal peace then a sensation can't allow it as it would appear and disappear.

Shame, sadness, pleasure are labels given for sensations. Instead of stopping the looking at the level of labels, go behind them and look for the raw sensations. Be curious about sadness : which sensations are expressing this? Do the same for shame, pleasure, fear, …

I have been stopping at the label, there's an automatic turning away. I will now disregard the label and continue to experience the sensations directly with curiosity. Just like the label "apple" the raw sensation is more than the label.

Thanks for listing your expectations. Some of them are realistic, others are not. Just leave them aside during our dialog. Be like a new born, no expectation.

I will do my best, aside from these expectations there is only curiosity of what I am, and what this life is that fuels this inquiry.

There is no "I" found in experience.

Is it a seeing in direct experience or just a thought arising?

Both, the thought follows the direct experience.

I have been trying to direct attention (in a sense the direction of attention isn't my doing it's just an effect of being guided by you) to any "unease" body sensation however attention slides back into thoughts automatically.

Is there a problem with thoughts? The key is that : thought does not know anything about what is here now. It is just a thought. Don’t give credit to thoughts. They are like clouds passing by.

They are problematic because they are taken to be true. Just today a thought arose about how 1 year of work and money was taken from me and there were strong anger/sadness sensations. Other thoughts that don't relate to attachments easily flow in and out without much issue.
Instead of engaging with thought should attention be placed on inquiring who has the thought or body sensations or something else?

There is only here, now however I can't define "here" or "now". It cannot be otherwise. All memory that appears distracts from the other senses however it is also just appearing here and now and then the here now switches back to the senses on it's own.

Here now means where you are in this very moment. The attention goes to the senses appearances as it goes to thoughts. Look at the senses appearances and tell me if there is you, a separate self as an appearance?

Where I am is not easily locatable, there is the visual field and body sensations that I'm aware of however I don't know where they are being experienced just that they are and therefore I am.
Looking at senses appearances without thought/memory there is just a flowing of senses. Thought and memory combine vision and body sense into a body and the imagination tacks on a head above it. In direct experiences there is only the flow.

On this reflection fear is arising about lack of control. Thoughts are arising saying "but how will I fix XYZ without control". These are also arising here and now.

Yes thoughts are arising, is there an I willing to fix something or “I will fix XYZ” is just a thought ?

Just thoughts arising, there is no "I" that is arising. Each time this is asked there is an automatic assumption that there is an "I" and only upon looking is it not found.

They are arising by themselves, implying that they will/will not be entertained and proposing "bad" outcomes if not. There doesn't appear to be control when looked at directly.
Do you see that what is said above is a train of thoughts?

Yes, I will allow them to pass like clouds and see what arises.

We are not arguing about the existence of the “I”, I invite you to look at the “I” and describe it for me.

"I" is a combination of thoughts and memories. Without this there is just experiencing.

As I said above, the clue is to give no credit to thoughts, they are unsentient, empty like pots.

What is sentient? There is sentience.

What is the difference between thoughts happening that are not believed and thoughts happening that are believed?
Belief itself is a thought reinforcing other thoughts, do you see this?

Belief is a thought arising as well. When a negative thought is believed then the corresponding sensations arise consistently. If thoughts don't connect to direct experience (empty pots and insentient), how is this so?

[warissem]

Good evening

Ok so what I'm understanding is that thoughts have no connect to what is appearing in the senses except that they also occur here and now.

Yes.

The thoughts are completely blind to all sensory experience and have no connection to them at all?

Yes, in direct experience you cannot find a link between a thought, a label and the sensory experience. Have you seen this?

If this is the case how are they consistent in that when the shape of a mug appears in vision the label in thought is always "mug". If thoughts are completely blind to the senses how are they consistent? This has been a point of confusion for a long time.

Yes, it is due to a programming, a learning. In my mother tongue, when a mug is seen the label is “afendjal”, in French the label is “tasse”. There is no real solid link between the appearance and the label. Do you see that what is here now, the sense appearances, do not change with the change of labels?

I have been stopping at the label, there's an automatic turning away. I will now disregard the label and continue to experience the sensations directly with curiosity. Just like the label "apple" the raw sensation is more than the label.

Yes, good. Let me know what is found.

They are problematic because they are taken to be true. Just today a thought arose about how 1 year of work and money was taken from me and there were strong anger/sadness sensations.

Anger/sadness arise and action is taken. It is ordinary when there is no suffering. The advice you give to a friend in the same situation is the normal way.

Instead of engaging with thought should attention be placed on inquiring who has the thought or body sensations or something else?

Have you seen that there is no thinker?
Is there a you, a separate self to whom thoughts are arising?
Yes, instead of engaging with thoughts be knowingly aware of direct experience. Stay with this as long as you can 24/7/

Where I am is not easily locatable, there is the visual field and body sensations that I'm aware of however I don't know where they are being experienced just that they are and therefore I am.

Is there a separation between being aware and the experience?

In direct experiences there is only the flow.

Great, how do you feel to see this?
Relax in the flow.

Just thoughts arising, there is no "I" that is arising. Each time this is asked there is an automatic assumption that there is an "I" and only upon looking is it not found.

Yes, good observation.

Yes, I will allow them to pass like clouds and see what arises.

Great.

What is sentient? There is sentience.

Yes there is sentience.
About the question “what is sentient”, the answer is : look for who wants to know.

Belief is a thought arising as well. When a negative thought is believed then the corresponding sensations arise consistently.

“a negative thought” is only a thought. A sensation is a sensation. As it said above about labeling a mug, the same applies with sensations. You can give a “negative thought” or a “positive thought” to a sensation, does the sensation change? Look at this deeply and let me know about your insights.

If thoughts don't connect to direct experience (empty pots and insentient), how is this so?

Just have a look at direct experience and let me know if that needs thoughts or labels to be.

A computer can be programmed to recognize shapes, forms and colors and give labels to them. This is a programming issue.

Best from you

[Bhn1618]

The thoughts are completely blind to all sensory experience and have no connection to them at all?

Yes, in direct experience you cannot find a link between a thought, a label and the sensory experience. Have you seen this?

I have not. When I see the shape/color/texture that thought labels laptop in the visual field the label "laptop" appears. If thoughts were not linked at all to direct experience then thought would have no way of being consistent. One day it would label that shape/color/texture laptop and another day it would label it "chair" and a third day it would label it "car". The fact that the label is always "laptop" seems to indicate that thoughts are connected to the visual field somehow.
I don't think the label affects the visual experience ie you can label it something different like "computer" or "my PC" etc however the label is consistently used. If there was no connection at all I would assume that the label would change each time the laptop is noticed.

If this is the case how are they consistent in that when the shape of a mug appears in vision the label in thought is always "mug". If thoughts are completely blind to the senses how are they consistent? This has been a point of confusion for a long time.

Yes, it is due to a programming, a learning. In my mother tongue, when a mug is seen the label is “afendjal”, in French the label is “tasse”. There is no real solid link between the appearance and the label. Do you see that what is here now, the sense appearances, do not change with the change of labels?

I don't know what you mean by link here. The label does not affect the experience, that much is clear. There still seems to be a link otherwise how would the label consistently appear?

I have been stopping at the label, there's an automatic turning away. I will now disregard the label and continue to experience the sensations directly with curiosity. Just like the label "apple" the raw sensation is more than the label.
Yes, good. Let me know what is found.

Still investigating, so far it's noticed that the sensation is not static. The sensation leaves after a while, there's still a lot of resistance to the experience of it but the curiosity seems to be stronger most of the time.

Anger/sadness arise and action is taken. It is ordinary when there is no suffering. The advice you give to a friend in the same situation is the normal way.

There is suffering still as there are preferences for things to be different than they already are.

Instead of engaging with thought should attention be placed on inquiring who has the thought or body sensations or something else?

Have you seen that there is no thinker?
Is there a you, a separate self to whom thoughts are arising?
Yes, instead of engaging with thoughts be knowingly aware of direct experience. Stay with this as long as you can 24/7/

When looked for there is not experience of a thinker. Sometimes attention moves to a sensation in the head but not always. Thinking just flows.
Thoughts are known however there is no direct experience of a separate self.
There is an attempt to stay with the seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, smelling. Thoughts are also part of direct experience it seems but getting lost in them still happens frequently.

Where I am is not easily locatable, there is the visual field and body sensations that I'm aware of however I don't know where they are being experienced just that they are and therefore I am.

Is there a separation between being aware and the experience?

There is not experience of being aware. When I look to see if I am aware, attention moves to one of the senses and thoughts say "the fact that the sensation is experienced there must be awareness". Can awareness be experienced independent of other experiences? How?

In direct experiences there is only the flow.

Great, how do you feel to see this?
Relax in the flow

.

When this is noticed it doesn't stay long before attention jumps around to different senses and then thoughts. The flow is forgotten.
I will try to relax into the flow of direct experience.

What is sentient? There is sentience.
Yes there is sentience.

About the question “what is sentient”, the answer is : look for who wants to know.

A thought says "what is sentient", there is no direct experience of one who wants to know.

Belief is a thought arising as well.

When a negative thought is believed then the corresponding sensations arise consistently.
“a negative thought” is only a thought. A sensation is a sensation. As it said above about labeling a mug, the same applies with sensations. You can give a “negative thought” or a “positive thought” to a sensation, does the sensation change? Look at this deeply and let me know about your insights.

A sensation is just a sensation and is not affected by the labelling of it. Sensations or thoughts are labelled good/bad just with thoughts. Otherwise they are the way they are in experience.

If thoughts don't connect to direct experience (empty pots and insentient), how is this so?

Just have a look at direct experience and let me know if that needs thoughts or labels to be.

A computer can be programmed to recognize shapes, forms and colors and give labels to them. This is a programming issue.

Direct experience does not need thoughts. They are programmed to match different shapes, sensations etc however they do not affect the experience.

When a particular sensation/experience is labelled "bad" there seems to be further suffering happening in experience. If it is labelled good and believed a pleasurable sensation follows. In this way can thoughts affect sensations?

[Bhn1618]

In addition to this guiding I have been doing self inquiry and recently increased it to 2 hours at a time. I have experienced a spinning sensations in my head a few times. They last less than a minute and the strongest one was associated with the visual field spinning as well. Is this common?

[warissem]

Good evening

I have not. When I see the shape/color/texture that thought labels laptop in the visual field the label "laptop" appears.

Yes, it is like a program : when a color/shape is seen, a corresponding label appears. It does not mean that a thought (label) is linked to the object. I want you to see that there is NO phenomenal link (it cannot be seen, nor heard, nor smelt, nor tasted, nor felt).
Look from the point of view of a baby : the 5 senses field is known but the baby does not give labels.

Still investigating, so far it's noticed that the sensation is not static. The sensation leaves after a while, there's still a lot of resistance to the experience of it but the curiosity seems to be stronger most of the time.

Great.

There is suffering still as there are preferences for things to be different than they already are.

Look at that which has preferences : what is it in direct experience?

When looked for there is not experience of a thinker. Sometimes attention moves to a sensation in the head but not always. Thinking just flows.

Thoughts are known however there is no direct experience of a separate self.

Yes, how do you feel to see this?

There is an attempt to stay with the seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, smelling. Thoughts are also part of direct experience it seems but getting lost in them still happens frequently.

Yes, there is no problem with thoughts, the problem is in believing them.

There is not experience of being aware.

Yes, being aware is not an experience.

When I look to see if I am aware, attention moves to one of the senses and thoughts say "the fact that the sensation is experienced there must be awareness".

Who or what is looking ? What is this “I”?
Is there an “I” to be aware or is there only being aware (awareness)?

Can awareness be experienced independent of other experiences? How?

As I said above, awareness is not an experience.

When this is noticed it doesn't stay long before attention jumps around to different senses and then thoughts. The flow is forgotten.

Are thoughts outside of the flow?

A thought says "what is sentient", there is no direct experience of one who wants to know.

Yes, is there “the one who wants to know”? Look.

A sensation is just a sensation and is not affected by the labelling of it. Sensations or thoughts are labelled good/bad just with thoughts. Otherwise they are the way they are in experience.

Yes, you are on the ground of direct experience. Be here without labeling what is seen, heard, smelt, tasted or felt. Look at the picture as a whole and the body is in the picture. Let me know about your insights.

Direct experience does not need thoughts. They are programmed to match different shapes, sensations etc however they do not affect the experience.

Great.

When a particular sensation/experience is labelled "bad" there seems to be further suffering happening in experience. If it is labelled good and believed a pleasurable sensation follows. In this way can thoughts affect sensations?

Look at sensations and give answer to your question.

In addition to this guiding I have been doing self inquiry and recently increased it to 2 hours at a time. I have experienced a spinning sensations in my head a few times. They last less than a minute and the strongest one was associated with the visual field spinning as well. Is this common?

Do not make too much effort. Seeing that there is no separate self is simple. Take it easy and relax.

Best for you

[Bhn1618]

I have not. When I see the shape/color/texture that thought labels laptop in the visual field the label "laptop" appears.

Yes, it is like a program : when a color/shape is seen, a corresponding label appears. It does not mean that a thought (label) is linked to the object. I want you to see that there is NO phenomenal link (it cannot be seen, nor heard, nor smelt, nor tasted, nor felt).
Look from the point of view of a baby : the 5 senses field is known but the baby does not give labels.

Yes the POV of a baby is just 5 senses, no thoughts have been loaded into the program. The label has no ability to perceive phenomenal experience ie the label can not see/hear/smell/taste/feel it just shows up after the experience. That is why different languages can label the same experience differently.

Can you help me understand why this is important to see that labels don't link to phenomena?
I am also curious about the experience of a memory that brings sadness. Experientially there are thought words/images appearing which then attention follows them and then it seems that they can cause phenomenal sensations of sadness. If there is no link then did I miss something here?

There is suffering still as there are preferences for things to be different than they already are.

Look at that which has preferences : what is it in direct experience?

Upon investigation I can only find a thought that believes "things should be different". As soon as this is believed suffering ensues. This thought automatically appears and disappears. There is no I in direct experience to whom it appears.
There's a thought that if this thought could be let go then all suffering would stop because all would be accepted as it is but who would be the "I" that let's it go and does the accepting?
It seems that there is no "I" just a repeating program that implies an "I" over and over. It's implied that this "I" is the one typing right now, it's implied that this "I" is the one motivated to meditate, the one being guided etc.

When looked for there is not experience of a thinker. Sometimes attention moves to a sensation in the head but not always. Thinking just flows.
Thoughts are known however there is no direct experience of a separate self.

Yes, how do you feel to see this?

Initially confusion and fear. Confusion from realizing that the way things are in direct experience don't match the way it's thought about. Fear that the lack of control will lead to worse outcomes.
At the same time there is no "I" in direct experience to be confused/afraid. Is there fear of bad experience? Yes. There is no one for whom "bad" experience is happening. There is just experience and it's unstoppable and unavoidable. There is resistance to submit to this truth and again who would be resisting/submitting?

Yes, being aware is not an experience.

[Bhn1618]

Yes, being aware is not an experience.

Can it be known directly? It can't be known as an experience by the mind but it seems evident from all experience that awareness exists.

When I look to see if I am aware, attention moves to one of the senses and thoughts say "the fact that the sensation is experienced there must be awareness".

Who or what is looking ? What is this “I”?
Is there an “I” to be aware or is there only being aware (awareness)?

There is just awareness of experiences and some of those include thoughts that imply an "I".

When this is noticed it doesn't stay long before attention jumps around to different senses and then thoughts. The flow is forgotten.

Are thoughts outside of the flow?

There is just awareness so no thoughts are not outside the flow of awareness. There are thoughts that imply an "I" that is outside of the flow of awareness. When it is noticed that attention was lost in thought then there are thoughts that claim that was "bad" and outside the "flow".

A thought says "what is sentient", there is no direct experience of one who wants to know.

Yes, is there “the one who wants to know”? Look

.

Sentient = ability to experience.
I don't find one who wants to know however there is knowing/awareness. If there is no "I" there must be something fueling this inquiry and all that is there is awareness of these thoughts, this curiosity, this confusion, this frustration. These are all also just thoughts and in direct experience there is the flow of experience including thoughts

A sensation is just a sensation and is not affected by the labelling of it. Sensations or thoughts are labelled good/bad just with thoughts. Otherwise they are the way they are in experience.
Y

es, you are on the ground of direct experience. Be here without labeling what is seen, heard, smelt, tasted or felt. Look at the picture as a whole and the body is in the picture. Let me know about your insights.

The picture in the seen contains a headless body until thoughts start moving and grab attention and starts to imagine an "I" that has a head and is the body. When the body is seen as headless it is not I that had the body but rather I am the whole image of a body without a head.
Being here without labelling there is awareness and attention is moving around grabbing experiences and mental representations/images follow.

When a particular sensation/experience is labelled "bad" there seems to be further suffering happening in experience. If it is labelled good and believed a pleasurable sensation follows. In this way can thoughts affect sensations?

Look at sensations and give answer to your question.

Upon investigation the label "suffering" and "pleasurable" are also labels!
Stopping at the label suffering/pleasurable leaves the experience as such however if attention stays with the experience then it seems even that can't be claimed.

Do not make too much effort. Seeing that there is no separate self is simple. Take it easy and relax.

The vertigo/spinning was found to be due to movement of the head and after following a youtube video of the Epley maneuver two times, the issue was resolved.

Thank you for all the guidance there is a lot of appreciation for this experience.

[warissem]

Hi

Can it be known directly? It can't be known as an experience by the mind but it seems evident from all experience that awareness exists.

Yes, it is the ordinary awareness (being aware).

There is just awareness of experiences and some of those include thoughts that imply an "I".

Wonderful, how do you feel to see this?

There is just awareness so no thoughts are not outside the flow of awareness.

Yes.

There are thoughts that imply an "I" that is outside of the flow of awareness.

Is it the case or there are just ignorant thoughts ?
Can something be known outside awareness?

When it is noticed that attention was lost in thought then there are thoughts that claim that was "bad" and outside the "flow".

Don’t believe thoughts, just let them come and go. It is normal to be lost in thoughts when you carry on a whole life of habits and conditioning. Just be KNOWINGLY. Notice that there is awareness of whatever arises.

I don't find one who wants to know however there is knowing/awareness. If there is no "I" there must be something fueling this inquiry and all that is there is awareness of these thoughts, this curiosity, this confusion, this frustration. These are all also just thoughts and in direct experience there is the flow of experience including thoughts

Do you see that “If there is no "I" there must be something fueling this inquiry” is also a thought?

The picture in the seen contains a headless body until thoughts start moving and grab attention and starts to imagine an "I" that has a head and is the body. When the body is seen as headless it is not I that had the body but rather I am the whole image of a body without a head.

Being here without labelling there is awareness and attention is moving around grabbing experiences and mental representations/images follow.

Are you the body?
Are you aware of the body?
Is the body aware of anything?

Upon investigation the label "suffering" and "pleasurable" are also labels!
Stopping at the label suffering/pleasurable leaves the experience as such however if attention stays with the experience then it seems even that can't be claimed.

Yes.

Thank you for all the guidance there is a lot of appreciation for this experience.

You are much welcome.

Best for you

[Bhn1618]

There is just awareness of experiences and some of those include thoughts that imply an "I".

Wonderful, how do you feel to see this?

It invites more curiosity to stay with direct experience. Nothing is outside of direct experience including thoughts but somehow it seems so.

There are thoughts that imply an "I" that is outside of the flow of awareness.

Is it the case or there are just ignorant thoughts ?
Can something be known outside awareness?

These are ignorant thoughts. Nothing can be known outside of awareness.

When it is noticed that attention was lost in thought then there are thoughts that claim that was "bad" and outside the "flow".

Don’t believe thoughts, just let them come and go. It is normal to be lost in thoughts when you carry on a whole life of habits and conditioning. Just be KNOWINGLY. Notice that there is awareness of whatever arises.

There is awareness of everything that arises. Is "Just be knowingly" an action? It seems that this is always the case whether there are ignorant thoughts that claim otherwise or not. There is always the flow of awareness never turning off/on.

I don't find one who wants to know however there is knowing/awareness. If there is no "I" there must be something fueling this inquiry and all that is there is awareness of these thoughts, this curiosity, this confusion, this frustration. These are all also just thoughts and in direct experience there is the flow of experience including thoughts

Do you see that “If there is no "I" there must be something fueling this inquiry” is also a thought?

Yes this is just a thought appearing. So there is no one/"I" that wants to know in direct experience just a ignorant thought that claims there is?

Being here without labelling there is awareness and attention is moving around grabbing experiences and mental representations/images follow.

Are you the body?
Are you aware of the body?
Is the body aware of anything?

I am not the body, I am aware of the body. I am not even aware of the body I am aware of sensations and seeing that thought uses to form the concept of a "body". The body is not aware, only awareness is aware.


What is the difference between attention and awareness? It seems that attention is just focusing awareness. Is there something that directs attention? In my direct experience the movement of attention is part of the flow and there is no control. When this is contemplated fear arises.

[warissem]

Hi

There is awareness of everything that arises. Is "Just be knowingly" an action?

No. It is just being and aware of being aware.

It seems that this is always the case whether there are ignorant thoughts that claim otherwise or not. There is always the flow of awareness never turning off/on.

Yes, great to see this.

Do you see that “If there is no "I" there must be something fueling this inquiry” is also a thought?

Yes this is just a thought appearing. So there is no one/"I" that wants to know in direct experience just a ignorant thought that claims there is?
Being here without labelling there is awareness and attention is moving around grabbing experiences and mental representations/images follow.

Is there a distance, a separation between awareness and experience?

I am not the body, I am aware of the body. I am not even aware of the body I am aware of sensations and seeing that thought uses to form the concept of a "body". The body is not aware, only awareness is aware.

Yes, yes, there is all what is : split apart "what is here now" from the labels. Can a label change "what is here now"?

What is the difference between attention and awareness? It seems that attention is just focusing awareness. Is there something that directs attention? In my direct experience the movement of attention is part of the flow and there is no control. When this is contemplated fear arises.

Yes, there is no separation : only labels, concepts are separating. Being aware = awareness = seeing = hearing = smelling = tasting = feeling sensations= thinking = experiencing, ... You can see it for yourself in direct experience. Take the example of seeing : is seeing separate from being aware? Is there a me, a separate self doing the seeing?
Let me know about your insights.
Is there a separate self in any shape or form?
Feel free to expose any lasting doubt.

Best wishes

[Bhn1618]

There is awareness of everything that arises. Is "Just be knowingly" an action?

No. It is just being and aware of being aware.

If it's not an action or movement then is it possible to not be aware of being aware?

Do you see that “If there is no "I" there must be something fueling this inquiry” is also a thought?
Yes this is just a thought appearing. So there is no one/"I" that wants to know in direct experience just a ignorant thought that claims there is?
Being here without labelling there is awareness and attention is moving around grabbing experiences and mental representations/images follow.

Is there a distance, a separation between awareness and experience?

In thought there is awareness of experience however in direct experience there is just experience. There is no border between the two in experience only when experience is reflected on in thought does there seem to be a separation however even in that moment it's just the experience of thinking with no distance between awareness and the experience of thinking.

I am not the body, I am aware of the body. I am not even aware of the body I am aware of sensations and seeing that thought uses to form the concept of a "body". The body is not aware, only awareness is aware.

Yes, yes, there is all what is : split apart "what is here now" from the labels. Can a label change "what is here now"?

What is here now is here now. Labels appear here now but do not change what is. Labels like apples or shame make what is now appear static however even that is flowing.

What is the difference between attention and awareness? It seems that attention is just focusing awareness. Is there something that directs attention? In my direct experience the movement of attention is part of the flow and there is no control. When this is contemplated fear arises.

Yes, there is no separation : only labels, concepts are separating. Being aware = awareness = seeing = hearing = smelling = tasting = feeling sensations= thinking = experiencing, ... You can see it for yourself in direct experience. Take the example of seeing : is seeing separate from being aware? Is there a me, a separate self doing the seeing?
Let me know about your insights.
Is there a separate self in any shape or form?
Feel free to expose any lasting doubt.

Seeing is not separate from awareness there is the experiencing seeing happening. Only in thought reflection does it become implied seer and seen however in direct experience it's just seeing followed by thinking.
The "me" is implied in the flow of thinking and not experienced directly.

There is much clarity in seeing this pattern of implied "I" yet there is thinking and sensing that is looking for this irrational concept of peace with what is. As I share the doubt I can see it's just the flow of thinking and sensing without labels. There is an expectation of a release and peace with what is. Is it unrealistic to expect that pattern to stop? Again as I type this I can ask myself who is the "I" that is expecting the pattern to stop?