Greetings!

[poppyseed]

Hi Blanca
Good! You’ve now seen that thoughts don’t block anything, no self can be found, no thinker, no understander can be found, seeing happens without concepts
Now we make this even simpler.

It's more like my attention (peripheral or direct) on them can be amplified or dimmed based on thoughts. For example, I am very focused on typing this response, so I don't really register anything my other senses are picking up. I'm not sure that is relevant to the act of looking, though.

Actually this is a good time to look at the idea of focus and attention. Close your eyes and sit quietly for 10-15 minutes. Watch what focus does, focus on focusing, attention itself.

Do you move it, or does it moves by itself? Hold focus on breath - see how it moves to thoughts, sensations, feelings, sounds. Is this something you control?
What moves attention? Can anything be found that moves attention, or does attention/focus move on its own?

A level deeper… Is there actually something called “attention” that can be found? Can it be seen? Felt? Located?
Or is there just seeing, hearing, …? IAre there attention AND experience, or just THIS?
You say attention focuses on “one thing” instead of another. Check this:
Without labels, are there separate “things” at all?
Or is there just one seamless experience (THIS)?
For example, right now are there “typing” + “sound” + “sensation” separate things?
Or is that separation created by thought (labels like apples and cups of coffee)?
Look directly! Without using words, can anything be divided? Is there something to focus on versus something else? Or is there just a whole, undivided experiencing with thought carving it into parts and calling that “focus” or “attention”?
Is there attention moving between separate things, or one seamless experience including thoughts describing it as divided? Without labels what is there to focus ON?
Don’t think about it. Look and report what is actually found.

Seeing happens, but the understanding is more about the concepts that underlie the act of looking (i.e. the very ideas that are expressed in enlightenment quotes or anything else).

Check this carefully! A thought appears “look” or “pay attention”. Is that anything more than a thought?
Now see what happens next… Seeing is already happening, hearing is already happening, sensation is already happening. Did the thought “look” create any of that? Can athought do anything? Or did it just appear alongside what was already here (first thoughts)?
Look very closely :) Is “looking” something you are doing? Or is it a thought about looking plus experience already happening?
So check. Is there a “looker” doing something called looking, or just experience and sometimes a thought saying “look”? Is thinking the thought "LOOK" in your control? Orjust appears when it appears?
Don’t answer conceptually. Report what is actually found.

when I look, I don’t see a self

Is that dependent on “attention”/ effort /looking?
Or is it simply the case?
Check this! Even when you are not “looking”, does a self suddenly appear somewhere? Can it ever be found? Or is it always absent?
Is the self sometimes there, sometimes not? Or is it never there at all?
Love
Rali

[Blanca]

Hi Rali - Apologies for the delayed response!

Do you move it, or does it moves by itself? Hold focus on breath - see how it moves to thoughts, sensations, feelings, sounds. Is this something you control?
What moves attention? Can anything be found that moves attention, or does attention/focus move on its own?

I meditate regularly, so I'm familiar with this dynamic. I typically use the breath or a flame as a meditative object, but I've never watched focus itself. When I did today, I found that I do not move it. It's not something under my control. Not even a little bit.

A level deeper… Is there actually something called “attention” that can be found? Can it be seen? Felt? Located?
Or is there just seeing, hearing, …? IAre there attention AND experience, or just THIS?

This one I have a tougher time see as true. There is such a thing as direct awareness and peripheral awareness. I understand there is the "thusness" of awareness moment-by-moment, but simultaneously, we're running peripheral awareness. Though when I look for any of it, I don't see it directly. I don't know. For some reason, this is a difficult one for me to get.

Without labels, are there separate “things” at all?
Or is there just one seamless experience (THIS)?
For example, right now are there “typing” + “sound” + “sensation” separate things?
Or is that separation created by thought (labels like apples and cups of coffee)?

The act of focusing my attention on something seems to break it up into parts, but otherwise, I think the experience is just one seamless thing.

I think one of the issues I'm having is that when I look, it still feels like something effortful that I'm doing. It doesn't feel like seeing or hearing, where it's happening and there's no separation between the experiencer and the experienced. The looking for a boundary or a lack of boundary seems to require me to actively do something.

Now see what happens next… Seeing is already happening, hearing is already happening, sensation is already happening. Did the thought “look” create any of that? Can a thought do anything? Or did it just appear alongside what was already here (first thoughts)?

It appears to be a thought that precedes the experience. But I think the paradox my mind keeps coming back to is your instruction to look. Because it seems to imply that it's something I need to do that I'm not already doing.

Check this! Even when you are not “looking”, does a self suddenly appear somewhere? Can it ever be found? Or is it always absent?
Is the self sometimes there, sometimes not? Or is it never there at all?

The self doesn't quite disappear, but it does seem to not be present when I'm really focused on something.

I don't know Rali, I had a really difficult time with this for some reason. :/

B

[poppyseed]

Hi Blanca

looking feels effortful… like something I’m doing

Look carefully. That feeling of effort, what is it, exactly? A sensation? A thought saying “I’m doing this”?
Check… A thought appears “I need to look”. Does that thought do anything? Or does it just appear? Did the thought move the eyes? Did the eyes listen to the thought and moved? Do the eyes have ears? Do the thoughts have hands?
You think “looking” is something special. It’s not. Right now, seeing is happening, hearing is happening, sensation is happening. That is already it.
“Looking” is just a thought pointing to what is already happening. Nothing extra is required.

it seems like something I need to do that I’m not already doing

Check this! Without doing anything… is seeing happening? Is hearing happening? Iis sensation happening? What else is there to “look” for?

… the paradox my mind keeps coming back to is your instruction to look.

If there is no Blanca, where is Rali? You are still describing this as one self talking to another. Apply the cup of coffee example to Rali. What is actually there

seeing what Rali has written, simply = seeing (colour)
Rali is there and I’m here, simply = thinking (thought)
understanding what Rali means, simply = thinking (thought)
looking at what she is pointing to, simply = hearing, seeing, feeling, tasting, smelling (that are already happening), and thinking (reflecting that new view of reality)
writing a report to Rali, simply = thinking (thought)

So are there instructions where to look, followed by looking (with what, remember the blackness exercise)? Or are there one thought (labelled Rali’s) "talking to another (labelled Blanca’s) followed by thoughts ABOUT what is really happening, understanding the empty nature of thoughts - thoughts talking about things that do not exist inherently but only as labels?
Is there anything else happening (new) that is not just thought self-organising, focusing more on DE instead of old stories? Has the seeing changed? Has the hearing changed? The feeling/sensations? Just the labels/the story …

Please let me know if you want to explore “others” in more detail!

There is such a thing as direct awareness and peripheral awareness … Though when I look for any of it, I don't see it directly.

Let’s see this through properly.
This “awareness”, can you see it, touch it, locate it anywhere? Or is there only seeing, hearing, sensation, thought?
Is “awareness” something in addition to experience? Or is it just a word used to describe experience?
Remember the blackness exercise. Is there “seeing blackness” + “awareness of seeing blackness”? Or just seeing?
Same with sound… is there “hearing” + “awareness of hearing”? Or just hearing? Where is the line that marks where one ends and the other begin - point to it???
Can you ever find awareness separate from seeing, hearing, feeling, tasting, smelling, thinking?
Or is “awareness” just another label pointing to the fact that these are already happening?
Don’t try to understand this. Don’t try to remember spiritual lingo. Look.
Can awareness be found as something real? Or only the experiences themselves?

the self doesn’t quite disappear

OK…Look carefully. At this moment, can you find a self?
Not a feeling. Not a thought. Something actual. Where is it?
You say it disappears when focused. Good. That already shows it’s not stable. But does it ever actually exist? Or is it always a thought plus a sensation appearing and disappearing? Is it more than a wrong label applied to stuff that already has labels? LOOK!
"When focused", simply = thoughts (about DE)
"when not focused", simply = thoughts (not aboout DE)

But where is the self except in thought content? Does it exist at all as something else but a pronoun in a sentence?

Here is an exercise. It takes about 20 minutes and you will need a pen a paper. This exercise is broken into 10 minute lots. For each 10 minute period pay attention to any bodily sensation i.e. is there any tightening, or any relaxing. For the first ten minutes write down what you are experiencing right now using the word “I”.
For example:
I am sitting on a chair,
I am hearing a clock ticking,
I am looking at a computer screen,
I am feeling hungry.

Get right to the point, no past or future fantasy, just a plain description of your experience right here and now.
Then for the next ten minutes continue writing down what you are experiencing but this time without using the word “I”. Just describe the experience as it is happening using verbs.

For example:
Sitting on a chair,
typing,
breathing,
blinking,
hearing the clock.

At the end of the twenty minutes compare the two ways in which the experience was labelled and answer the following questions:
Is one truer than the other, and If so, which one?
What is here without labels?
Do labels affect the experience or just describe it?

Love
Rali

[Blanca]

Hi Rali - Apologies for the delay in responding. It was an unusually busy weekend.

That feeling of effort, what is it, exactly? A sensation? A thought saying “I’m doing this”?

Yes, it’s a sensation, though I can’t really describe it. And a sort-of thought on top of this saying “you must do something you’re not already doing.” Though it isn’t an explicit. It doesn’t even feel like a full thought.

A thought appears “I need to look”. Does that thought do anything? Or does it just appear? Did the thought move the eyes? Did the eyes listen to the thought and moved? Do the eyes have ears? Do the thoughts have hands?

I’m not entirely sure the thought is even that clear.
There’s just an intention and then a movement. But no the thought doesn’t do anything, even if it were fully formed. I certainly see your point about eyes having ears or thought having hands. Thoughts can’t force physical movement.

Check this! Without doing anything… is seeing happening? Is hearing happening? Iis sensation happening? What else is there to “look” for?

I think the thing that’s confusing me is that you tell me to check or look but then the implication here is that it’s something I need to do. Something I’m not already doing. But then these questions imply it’s already happening. I went back and reread some of our first conversations, and you describe looking as "noticing" what is already happening. So I suppose the thing I'm supposed to do is notice? Just want to be sure I'm understanding.

If there is no Blanca, where is Rali? You are still describing this as one self talking to another. Apply the cup of coffee example to Rali. What is actually there

I think one of the issues is that I didn't continue to do the coffee cup exercise daily. I actually didn't even remember what you were referring to here and I had to go back to our older conversations to look.

So are there instructions where to look, followed by looking (with what, remember the blackness exercise)? Or are there one thought (labelled Rali’s) "talking to another (labelled Blanca’s) followed by thoughts ABOUT what is really happening, understanding the empty nature of thoughts - thoughts talking about things that do not exist inherently but only as labels?
Is there anything else happening (new) that is not just thought self-organising, focusing more on DE instead of old stories? Has the seeing changed? Has the hearing changed? The feeling/sensations? Just the labels/the story …

The Rali example was helpful. I think that yes, I am making both you and I solid things instead of noticing the components that make up the illusion.

Please let me know if you want to explore “others” in more detail!

Yes, that might be helpful, actually.

This “awareness”, can you see it, touch it, locate it anywhere? Or is there only seeing, hearing, sensation, thought?
Is “awareness” something in addition to experience? Or is it just a word used to describe experience?

For direct awareness, yes, it is only seeing, hearing, etc. But peripheral awareness is something else. It is the background scanning that happens all the time. I'm not aware of it (by definition) but it's definitely happening.

But does it ever actually exist? Or is it always a thought plus a sensation appearing and disappearing? Is it more than a wrong label applied to stuff that already has labels? LOOK!

When I look, there is no me. Only a thought about the sum of other thoughts.

But where is the self except in thought content?

This one made me think. :)

Is one truer than the other, and If so, which one?
What is here without labels?
Do labels affect the experience or just describe it?

One isn't truer than the other, nor is it more accurate. The labeling didn't impact the experience one way or another. Assuming you meant the label of "I," I didn't need the "I" to experience anything directly. I will try this exercise again (though maybe shorter :)

Hope you're well

B

[poppyseed]

Hi Blanca,
Good. This is very clear. Let’s go directly to this part:

But peripheral awareness is something else. It is the background scanning that happens all the time. I'm not aware of it (by definition) but it's definitely happening.

Look carefully! If you are not aware of it…how do you know it exists?
Is that anything more than a thought?
Drop the definitions!
Can something that is not experienced be found in direct experience? Or is it only a concept?
You say:

“it’s definitely happening”

Look again! Is that known directly? Or inferred by thought/memories/learned stuff?
It’s very important to stay only with what is actually present.
Is there anything here that is not seen, not heard, not felt, not thought, yet still known?
Or is that idea of “background awareness” just another thought?

I suppose the thing I’m supposed to do is notice

Look carefully.
Is “noticing” something you do?
Or is it simply an experience already happening and sometimes a thought saying “I notice”?
Without adding anything… Is there awareness + experience or just THIS/whatever is appearing?
Don’t think. Look only at what is actually here.
We’ll look at others once this is seen through
Love
Rali

[poppyseed]

Hey Blanca
Just checking up on you... Is everything OK?
Love
Rali

[Blanca]

Hi Rali - My apologies. I didn't receive a notification via email that you posted a response. I was actually logging on to see if YOU were okay because I hadn't heard from you. I forgot that I need to check daily because the email notification doesn't always work. But yes, I'm well and hope you are too.

If you are not aware of it…how do you know it exists?
Is that anything more than a thought?

It does mostly exist conceptually, though I do experience the product of peripheral awareness. Something will come into my attention from my periphery that I wasn't aware I was even tracking peripherally.

Can something that is not experienced be found in direct experience? Or is it only a concept?

This is one of those points of confusion for me. It is something I am experiencing, but I may not be aware of it. Much like the things I "look" at as part of this inquiry are always there, but I'm not paying attention to it.

Is that known directly? Or inferred by thought/memories/learned stuff?

I think it's undeniable that thought, memories and learning all play a part here.

Is there anything here that is not seen, not heard, not felt, not thought, yet still known?
Or is that idea of “background awareness” just another thought?

See above. I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. In that something can be not quite known but not necessarily just a thought.

Is “noticing” something you do?
Or is it simply an experience already happening and sometimes a thought saying “I notice”?
Without adding anything… Is there awareness + experience or just THIS/whatever is appearing?

I suppose the experience is just the the think I'm looking at with the thought "I notice."

B

[poppyseed]

Hi Blanca,
Good — let’s look even more precisely here.

Something will come into my attention from my periphery that I wasn't aware I was even tracking peripherally.

Look carefully. Is there ever anything experienced that is not known at all?
Or is it rather that something is present, but there is no thought commenting on it?
For example: there may be sounds you weren’t “paying attention” to, sensations in the body you weren’t focusing on. But check, were they actually unexperienced? Or just not labeled or commented on by thought?
So look closely… Is there experience happening and sometimes thoughts about it?
Or is there experience happening and another layer called “awareness” noticing it?
Can anything be experienced without being present?
Any story about not experienced experience requires a past (which is only a memory/ thought happening right now)), an alternative scenario - but these are just more stories. SEE that! How is it known that memories are real? Is there somewhere a storage for memories that you can access and decide which one you need? LOOK!
Is there ever an experience that is not experienced? WHEN was it not experienced if all you have is NOW???
Or is that just a confusing way of thinking about it?
Here is a fun exercise for you… The following link is a 7 minute clip of a soccer game. If you prefer another sport…please feel free to find one to do this exercise with.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yy5pL-myDzw
Watch one minute with the sound turned OFF, watching ‘people’ messing about with a round thing on a field, up and down, up and down. Let it sink in, the whole experience. Once the first minute is completed, now watch another whole minute with the commentary turned ON. Notice the differences. Notice how the commentator (thought) offers lots of know-how, even advice. It seems to feel as though they can influence, somehow, what is going on, as though one outcome is much preferred to the opposite outcome. The commentary may seem to heighten any supporter feelings which are there, and call for an identification with one team or other, and with the importance of the game itself.

Now turn the volume OFF AGAIN and just watch the action with NO audible commentary, the shapes moving around on the screen etc. Again notice all the differences in what is appearing as experience. Now turn the volume ON again and ignore what you think you know thought is talking about, and just notice it as sound.

What did you find when doing this exercise? Is the commentary on the soccer game a necessity for the play to happen?
And in the same way, is the inner narration of thought a necessity for the play of life to happen?
Just SEE:
Is there ever anything more than senses + thoughts… with some thoughts saying "I notice", "I'm peripheral awareness" and further labelling/splitting the seemless whole into "things to be focused on"?

the experience is the thing I’m looking at, with the thought ‘I notice’

I think the thing that’s confusing me is that you tell me to check or look but then the implication here is that it’s something I need to do. Something I’m not already doing. But then these questions imply it’s already happening. I went back and reread some of our first conversations, and you describe looking as "noticing" what is already happening. So I suppose the thing I'm supposed to do is notice? Just want to be sure I'm understanding.

Is there actually a “thing you’re looking at” and something separate that notices it?
Or is there just seeing and sometimes a thought saying “I notice”?
So “looking”/”noticing” is not something you do. It’s simply what is already happening being obvious.
When seeing happens, is there a “thing” separate from seeing? Or is there just seeing/seen as one?
The thought “I need to look” or “I need to notice” appears. Does it do any noticing? Or is it just another appearance?
Is there experience plus a noticer of it? Someone/something pointing a torch lighting up hidden stuff?
Or just experience and commentary? Sometimes about DE, sometimes about old stories.
SO...
Is there something being experienced and something experiencing it? Or just… this?
Look carefully. Right now seeing is happening, hearing is happening, sensation is happening, thought is happening. That is already the case. Nothing needs to be added.
Without doing anything… is seeing happening? Is hearing happening? Did you do that?
So what is “looking”? It’s not an action. It’s just the absence of overlooking. It’s thoughts about what is happening (DE) instead of old conditioned patterns of describing. commentary. “Look carefully” is a thought interrupting old loops of conditioned thought, making the commentary about DE. SEE that!
Is there someone/something doing looking or just seeing, hearing, sensation, thought already happening?
No need to do anything. Just don’t add anything on top. (another thought-virus disrupting secondary thoughts)
There are no two peripheral awarenesses talking to each other, there are just two different streams of thoughts with no owners. If there were two awarenesses, what contains them? What makes one “you” and the other “not you”?
Now back to “peripheral awareness” as:

It is something I am experiencing, but I may not be aware of it.

YOU experience awareness? Awareness is you? That “I” thought can be so sneaky! And before you answer this… Awareness can experience itself? Can awareness split itself into “awareness” and “not awareness” in order to observe itself? Does it have a mirror? How does that work exactly? Don’t assume things! SEE!
Furthermore….
If you are not aware of it… in what way is it experienced?
Experience means seen, heard, felt, thought. If it is not any of these, how is it known?
Something appears. Then a thought says: “I must have been tracking it peripherally”. Check:
Is that known directly? Or is it an explanation?
Right now… Is there anything present that is not seen, not heard, not felt, not thought?
Or is everything that is known always one of these?
Is there experience plus something hidden behind it (peripheral awareness), or just what is appearing and thoughts explaining it (be it DE labels or old way)? Is “awareness” not simply the fact that something is appearing with a description reflecting its appearance???
Don’t think about it/ remember what you’ve been told. Look only at what is directly found.
Love
Rali

[Blanca]

Hi Rali! My responses below:

Look carefully. Is there ever anything experienced that is not known at all?
Or is it rather that something is present, but there is no thought commenting on it?

Ah... this distinction landed. I see what you mean. Something can be peripherally known but not commented on, so it doesn't register to me as "known."

Can anything be experienced without being present?
Any story about not experienced experience requires a past (which is only a memory/ thought happening right now)), an alternative scenario - but these are just more stories. SEE that! How is it known that memories are real? Is there somewhere a storage for memories that you can access and decide which one you need? LOOK!
Is there ever an experience that is not experienced? WHEN was it not experienced if all you have is NOW???
Or is that just a confusing way of thinking about it?

You lost me here. I genuinely don't even know what I'm supposed to look at. I do not think memories are real. I've read that the brain reconstructs, rather than recalls, events from the past, which is why they're so unreliable. My own memory is very unreliable, so I've never regarded them as real.

What did you find when doing this exercise?

This was a really cool exercise. Immediately when I read the instructions, I thought "wait, the soccer announcer is going to be like my inner monologue chattering away!" And what's interesting is that watching the video without sound made the experience much intimate. Meaning that I didn't have the announcer telling me whether something was good or bad, so I just experienced it directly. When I listened to the commentary, a story immediately started. "This player did something good." "This player just made a mistake, etc." The part I struggled with was just watching and listening as just colors/shapes and sound. My thoughts immediately kicked in to tell me what things might mean.

Is the commentary on the soccer game a necessity for the play to happen?
And in the same way, is the inner narration of thought a necessity for the play of life to happen?

No not necessary at all. If anything, it's a hindrance to experiencing the play directly.

Is there ever anything more than senses + thoughts… with some thoughts saying "I notice", "I'm peripheral awareness" and further labelling/splitting the seemless whole into "things to be focused on"?

I think the thing I struggle with is that those don't feel like thoughts. They seem to be more like things I feel before thought.

When seeing happens, is there a “thing” separate from seeing? Or is there just seeing/seen as one?

No there is no separation. But I'm not clear on how this relates to the discussion about awareness. Are you saying that peripheral awareness and direct awareness are just a single thing?

The thought “I need to look” or “I need to notice” appears. Does it do any noticing? Or is it just another appearance?
Is there experience plus a noticer of it? Someone/something pointing a torch lighting up hidden stuff?
Or just experience and commentary? Sometimes about DE, sometimes about old stories.

There is just a noticer. Just experience and commentary.

Without doing anything… is seeing happening? Is hearing happening? Did you do that?

Yes, seeing and hearing is happening without a doer.

YOU experience awareness? Awareness is you? That “I” thought can be so sneaky! And before you answer this… Awareness can experience itself? Can awareness split itself into “awareness” and “not awareness” in order to observe itself? Does it have a mirror? How does that work exactly? Don’t assume things! SEE!

Wow, this one landed hard. When I look, there is no separate me "having awareness." There is just awareness. No separate me.

Is “awareness” not simply the fact that something is appearing with a description reflecting its appearance???

Ah... I see. What I call "awareness" is experience with the label automatically applied. In essence, it becomes a concept. Yes, that is my experience when I look. Though I wouldn't have been able to articulate it.

Very interesting and illuminating session. :)

B

[poppyseed]

Hi Blanca,
This is very clear. Stay right here. Look carefully at what you wrote:

There is just a noticer. Just experience and commentary.

These two don’t match. It might be a typo but it’s worth investigating one more time anyway…
So check directly! Is there a noticer and experience?
Or just experience and thoughts about it?
Take your time here. This “noticer”— what is it exactly? Can you find it anywhere?
Not as an idea - something actual.
Or is there only seeing, hearing….just whatever is happening and then a thought saying: “this is being noticed”.
Without the labels that cut out “things”, the right commentary should be: “THIS, THIS, THIS, THIS…” There is nothing to be noticed - there is always just THIS with no parts. Labels (even DE labels like seeing, hearing, ...) are useful (some of them) for communication. Remember the analogy with the icons on your desktop, representing zero's and one's, but not findable in real life. So check:
When seeing happens, is there a seer/noticer? Or just seeing?
“A seer notices/sees the seen” is just language, but do these three sentence building parts exist as separate or all of them just point to just seeing? Draw an invisible line to something that you are looking at the moment. If there are three separate parts, you should be able to see marks on that line where the seen ends, seeing begins and ends, and then the seer starts. Are there such marks?
Even further... without the labels are there separate seeing, hearing, ... - or just THIS/ seamless happening?
You already saw:

What I call "awareness" is experience with the label automatically applied. In essence, it becomes a concept.

Good. Is “noticer” anything more than the same kind of label?

You lost me here. I genuinely don't even know what I'm supposed to look at. I do not think memories are real. I've read that the brain reconstructs, rather than recalls, events from the past, which is why they're so unreliable. My own memory is very unreliable, so I've never regarded them as real.

Good — let’s look very carefully at this part:
You said before that something appears in attention that you “weren’t aware of before.”
Let’s check that directly.
Something appears (a sound, sensation, etc.) Then a thought says: “I wasn’t aware of that before”. Look closely… is that known directly? Or is it a thought about the past/a memory?
Check the timing… Something appears, a thought appears saying “this was already happening" That second part, is it anything more than a thought happening now?
Can you ever actually directly experience “something happening without being experienced”? Or is that always a thought about a past moment?
Is there anything here that is not experienced yet known to exist?
Or is everything that is ever known… only what appears now?

Don’t think about it. Watch it happen in real time.

Just to let you know, I will be travelling back tomorrow, so I will be able to reply on Tuesday. Use the opportunity to really sprend some time playing with these questions :)
Love
Rali