A recent seeker

[gagliano1770]

Dear Rowena,

Continuing:

That's right, "you know how to do it, because you do it." Does that 'you' mentioned refer to anything in particular or just a way of languaging to say that somehow it is known? Is there a 'you' that can be found, or experienced separately from what is happening in direct experience?

I said "you" because it seems easier to use a pronoun when trying to talk about these concepts. But no, there isn't a you that can be found, or experienced separately from what is happening.

Please describe to me in your direct experience what is going on when you sense resistance/hard to grasp
What is your reaction? Please do a clinical investigation based on your direct experience, not conceptual.

I think what's happening is that I am not "knowing" this absence of an I or a self that has agency. I can glimpse it if I concentrate hard on it, but it's not the knowing that I've heard described. So the tightness feels like it's the result of effort to try to grasp these concepts.

What can a thought do i.e. does it have agency?, and
Can a thought initiate anything or is that just another thought story, an overlay to what is actually happening?

A thought does not have agency. A thought cannot initiate anything. If thoughts can't initiate anything, what does initiate anything?

In your immediate, direct experience there will be thinking happening about the above sentences.
And there will be body sensations that somehow seem to be linked.
But look closely, can a sensation have an opinion? What's going on?

A sensation can't have an opinion. A sensation just is, and we lay opinions over the sensations. That is clear to me.

Did I answer your questions?

Thank you,
Glen

[Noro]

Hello Glen,

Please describe to me in your direct experience what is going on when you sense resistance/hard to grasp

What is your reaction? Please do a clinical investigation based on your direct experience, not conceptual.
I think what's happening is that I am not "knowing" this absence of an I or a self that has agency. I can glimpse it if I concentrate hard on it, but it's not the knowing that I've heard described. So the tightness feels like it's the result of effort to try to grasp these concepts.

This is very well spotted, and I'm sorry to tell you that this game of 'hide and seek' will continue for a little while. The "I" that wants 'to know' whether it is absent/present is the made-up selfing mechanism at work!! You have looked, you have seen that there is no actual 'thing' we refer to as a separate self that can be found separate from what is, our direct experience. And PLEASE let go of all descriptions and expectations, everything that is conceptual is in the realm of thought. Thought is second-hand, here-say. This is a path of putting aside concepts and experiencing for ourselves and we do this by direct inquiry into our direct experience. It is the only way we can find out for sure.

You can glimpse "it" if I concentrate hard on it.

This sentence is very important.
"You can glimpse 'it'.." to what does 'it' refer that can be separated out of the total movement of experience?
How does 'it' appear other than a sensation and a thought saying "that's 'it'?

"If I concentrate hard on it." Is this concentration in meditation you are talking about? Words like that can be tricky because of the way we understood them when we were young. 'Concentration', 'effort', 'focus' all imply a 'doing' by a 'someone'. Any 'doing' will get you nowhere with this situation. Perhaps this is not the case with you, but I do suggest you look with a keen eye on what is going on in your direct experience when "concentrating hard on it" is happening. And here's a pointer, look to movements of tension or contraction in the body.

If thoughts can't initiate anything, what does initiate anything?

Think of it this way, thoughts are responding to impulses that are either habitual or lurking in the back ground of your conscious mind. You have to go to the dentist next week, you know it is next Tuesday.
Did thought make the appointment, or was there a prior knowing that a dentist visit was necessary?
Then next Tuesday arrives and that prior knowing produces thought that responds "Yes, I have to go to the dentist today." Everything works like that. You could say that thought is part of our conditioning, but used in a much larger sense that what it is normally referred to. Every moment is a kind of re-conditioning, or update, and thought is that sensory part of us that responds to the updating going on. Does this make sense? Things are happening below the surface of our conscious mind that cause decisions and choices to be made, and thought is the overlay.



DRINKS MEDITATION - CHOICE/AGENCY
The aim of the following exercise is to discover whether the function of choice can really be found or confirmed in actual experience. The idea of making ‘choices‘ is a very clear example of a function that we wrongly identify as the basis of our identity.

Here's what’s needed - a chair, a table and two different drinks. Any two drinks you like are okay for this: coffee, tea, milk, water, juices, smoothies, beer, wine, etc.

Preparation - Place the two drinks side by side on the table in front of you, sit comfortably on the chair and mentally label them as drink A and drink B.

Experiment - Finding the function of choice

Sit for a few moments, take a few relaxed breaths and let the dust settle. When you feel ready:

1. Look at drink A and at drink B. Think about their respective qualities, the things you like about them, compare and weigh the pros and cons of each. See if a preference is manifesting for one or the other.

2. Count to 5.

3. Choose one of the drinks. Pick it up and take a sip.

Questions:

Remember that we’re looking for some kind of function, a something, an ‘I’ which is doing the ‘choosing’.

In step 1 when thinking about their respective qualities, did you ‘choose’ the qualities? Or did they kind of appear by themselves? If some preferences manifested, did you ‘choose’ these preferences? Or did they just pop up by themselves?

In step 2 when you counted to 5, if the preferences took the back seat while the numbers took the front seat, did you ‘choose’ this sequence of event? Did you ‘choose’ to shut down the preferences to give way to the counting?

Did you directly experience a mental function or faculty doing the ‘choosing’? Have you seen this function in action?

In step 3 where you made a choice, did you actually witness or directly experience a mental function or faculty an "I", doing the ‘choosing’? Did anything arise that announced, ‘I am the chooser’? If so, what does this function look like?

Sometimes we describe this sense of choosing as a ‘feeling’: It feels like ‘I’ did the 'choosing’. But the question is, can a feeling ‘choose’? Is it in the nature of a feeling to 'choose’?


Please let me know how you got on.

Warmly,

Rowena

[gagliano1770]

Dear Rowena,

Onward:

You can glimpse 'it'.." to what does 'it' refer that can be separated out of the total movement of experience?

By "it" I was referring to the lack of self or "I," that I feel I can only glimpse if I look or sense in a specific way. It doesn't feel like a knowing yet; it's something I have to try to do.

How does 'it' appear other than a sensation and a thought saying "that's 'it'?

No, now that you mention it, it doesn't appear as other than a sensation and a thought.

Think of it this way, thoughts are responding to impulses that are either habitual or lurking in the back ground of your conscious mind. You have to go to the dentist next week, you know it is next Tuesday.
Did thought make the appointment, or was there a prior knowing that a dentist visit was necessary?

Pardon me for asking this, but what's the difference? How can knowing happen without thought?

You could say that thought is part of our conditioning, but used in a much larger sense that what it is normally referred to. Every moment is a kind of re-conditioning, or update, and thought is that sensory part of us that responds to the updating going on. Does this make sense? Things are happening below the surface of our conscious mind that cause decisions and choices to be made, and thought is the overlay.

I confess I don't understand.

In step 1 when thinking about their respective qualities, did you ‘choose’ the qualities? Or did they kind of appear by themselves? If some preferences manifested, did you ‘choose’ these preferences? Or did they just pop up by themselves?

I didn't choose. They simply appeared.

In step 2 when you counted to 5, if the preferences took the back seat while the numbers took the front seat, did you ‘choose’ this sequence of event? Did you ‘choose’ to shut down the preferences to give way to the counting?

The numbers took the front seat, and I didn't choose to shut down the preferences.

Did you directly experience a mental function or faculty doing the ‘choosing’? Have you seen this function in action?

No, I didn't experience a mental function or faculty doing the choosing, but the chosen drink was the one that seemed preferable before I counted.

In step 3 where you made a choice, did you actually witness or directly experience a mental function or faculty an "I", doing the ‘choosing’? Did anything arise that announced, ‘I am the chooser’? If so, what does this function look like?

No.

Sometimes we describe this sense of choosing as a ‘feeling’: It feels like ‘I’ did the 'choosing’. But the question is, can a feeling ‘choose’? Is it in the nature of a feeling to 'choose’?

Then what is choosing? If I'm not choosing, and feelings aren't choosing, and thoughts aren't choosing, what's left? A choice is made. In this case it was made along the same lines as my preference. No surprise there. I'm confused.

Thank you,
Glen

[Noro]

Hello Glen,

As you say, onward!

By "it" I was referring to the lack of self or "I," that I feel I can only glimpse if I look or sense in a specific way. It doesn't feel like a knowing yet; it's something I have to try to do.

Nice, yes, I think I can get what you are referring to.... an energetic sensibility perhaps? There is a kind of knowing that comes when the glimpses arise, the knowing becomes more established. I want to say keep going with this, but 'you' can't put in any effort, it requires a lightness of touch!

Think of it this way, thoughts are responding to impulses that are either habitual or lurking in the back ground of your conscious mind. You have to go to the dentist next week, you know it is next Tuesday.
Did thought make the appointment, or was there a prior knowing that a dentist visit was necessary?

Pardon me for asking this, but what's the difference? How can knowing happen without thought?

Well, you are probably right, mental activity can be going on at a more subliminal level without an internal dialogue. All data referring both to practical everyday life as well as our 'personal' take on becomes part of our conditioning, and that conditioning conditions the responses or reactions that arise. I would call it a different kind of 'thinking' process, like the way you were referring to 'knowing' above.

Sometimes we describe this sense of choosing as a ‘feeling’: It feels like ‘I’ did the 'choosing’. But the question is, can a feeling ‘choose’? Is it in the nature of a feeling to 'choose’?

Then what is choosing? If I'm not choosing, and feelings aren't choosing, and thoughts aren't choosing, what's left? A choice is made. In this case it was made along the same lines as my preference. No surprise there. I'm confused.

The operative word here is 'what'!!! What implies a separate something that is controlling the show, choosing, deciding etc.
Can you, looking directly in the way we are working here together, find any separate 'thing' in your experience other than the experience itself??

Please spend some time observing 'your' actions throughout the day. How much time do you spend going about your life without thoughts appearing claiming ownership? When claiming ownership happens, that is usually because of some kind of identification with what is going on.

Please do this exercise in the format of the original exercise : MIND LABEL EXPERIENCE on the first page of this thread. Using the word 'choose' or 'chose' instead of "I am..." Write to me of your findings. Can you find any separate agent

I choose to sit on a chair. Sitting on a chair.
I choose to get up from the chair. Getting up from the chair.

Can you see that in your direct experience where we are learning to experience life from a much more energetic perspective a concept like choosing and whether there is an "I" or not doing the choosing become quite irrelevant. The direct experience is what is happening HERE/NOW. It is immediate, full on experiencing. When we get caught up in thinking about our direct experience we have already got pulled back from the immediacy.

Let's get this clear before we continue further.

Warmly,

Rowena

[gagliano1770]

Dear Rowena,

I've taken longer to respond because I had to move to a different location for the summer. I'm settled now for a few months, so...

The operative word here is 'what'!!! What implies a separate something that is controlling the show, choosing, deciding etc.
Can you, looking directly in the way we are working here together, find any separate 'thing' in your experience other than the experience itself??

No, I can't find any separate thing other than the experience. Here is a situation I often experience: I approach a stairway and an escalator going up to a higher floor of a building. My mental dialogue starts: "I really want to take the escalator today. But I haven't gotten many steps in today; I should take the stairs. But my legs are so tired from my workout earlier; just this once I'll take the escalator. No, I'm supposed to embrace discomfort; I really should just suck it up and take the stairs." At this point a decision is made, and as I write this, I'm not conscious of what is making the decision. It seems like I make it because I've been having this conversation with myself, but thinking back to the moment of decision, I can't pinpoint what makes the decision. I end up taking the stairs or the escalator.

The operative word here is 'what'!!! What implies a separate something that is controlling the show, choosing, deciding etc.
Can you, looking directly in the way we are working here together, find any separate 'thing' in your experience other than the experience itself??

I didn't mean to write it this way, but my story above segues well into your next question. I think I've answered it.

Please do this exercise in the format of the original exercise : MIND LABEL EXPERIENCE on the first page of this thread. Using the word 'choose' or 'chose' instead of "I am..." Write to me of your findings. Can you find any separate agent

As above:
I chose to take the stairs. Taking the stairs.
I chose to take the escalator. Taking the escalator.
I chose to wait to have dinner. Waiting to have dinner.
I couldn't find a separate agent, or even an attached agent, making the choices.

Can you see that in your direct experience where we are learning to experience life from a much more energetic perspective a concept like choosing and whether there is an "I" or not doing the choosing become quite irrelevant. The direct experience is what is happening HERE/NOW. It is immediate, full on experiencing. When we get caught up in thinking about our direct experience we have already got pulled back from the immediacy.

Ah. So are you saying that simply observing, or experiencing, is more important or more real than thinking about experience? If so, why?

Thank you,
Glen

[Noro]

Hello Gary,

I'm happy to hear that you are now settled for the summer.

No, I can't find any separate thing other than the experience. Here is a situation I often experience: I approach a stairway and an escalator going up to a higher floor of a building. My mental dialogue starts: "I really want to take the escalator today. But I haven't gotten many steps in today; I should take the stairs. But my legs are so tired from my workout earlier; just this once I'll take the escalator. No, I'm supposed to embrace discomfort; I really should just suck it up and take the stairs." At this point a decision is made, and as I write this, I'm not conscious of what is making the decision. It seems like I make it because I've been having this conversation with myself, but thinking back to the moment of decision, I can't pinpoint what makes the decision. I end up taking the stairs or the escalator.

That's a really good example. Seeing the inner dialogue of thought spewing out pros and cons, actually getting in the way with the natural flow.

Ah. So are you saying that simply observing, or experiencing, is more important or more real than thinking about experience? If so, why?

This is a really great question. First of all, there is a difference between simply observing and experiencing. Observing implies an observer, something more like a witness, a step back from experiencing, which, as we have been using the word here is a full on engagement of the senses which can also include thought.

The second point here is concerning the word 'real' and how it is being applied. What is real? What can we really know? Most 'knowledge' that we have has been learned through conditioning, school, society, text books, etc. We have learned for the most part to go along with the consensus version of reality. And of course, this is extremely important for our everyday functioning, but there are things that have been avoided or overlooked, and the assumption of the 'separate self' is one of those things.

Direct experience brings us to bottom-line raw data that we can actually experience for ourselves, and we need this in order to separate what is mind-made (pretty much everything in consensus reality) from what is actual (real). So this is why direct experience takes precedence over thinking.

1. Direct experience = looking to find a separate self located somewhere.
2. Thinking = My name is ........... and this is the story of my life which actually happened to 'me'.
1 + 2. Illusion seen = All the world of thought remains, but it is known that it is not actually real in the way conventional thinking portrays it.

So, one does not override the other in importance, they work together once the illusion is seen that there is no separate entity running the show. Is this clear for you now?

Have a look at this exercise again:

APPLE MEDITATION

In order to have the full direct experience of this meditation it is important to begin by taking a few deep breaths in order to feel calm and relaxed.

When looking at an apple in the usual way, we are looking at something in the visual field, and we will see that there's colour and then we will perceive a shape. Then thinking comes very quickly afterwards with a thought saying "apple" and maybe a thought saying, "I'm looking at an apple."

In actual or direct experience we are simply seeing, and the simple act of seeing does not include any interpretations or descriptions. Those are overlayed through thought onto the visual experience which is totally non-conceptual.

In actual fact, nothing is named in direct experience, (think of a baby that is looking around in wonder), however, as a concession, for the sake of communicating we can allow a minimum of thought content, in order to do this exercise; so we can say that colors and shapes are seen, and thinking is also seen but and thought content is not included.

Actual experience does not refer to thought content (including labels, interpretations and descriptions) about something.

Actual experience refers to the raw data of sound, color, smell, taste, sensation and the fact of thinking arising, but not its content.

So, as you do this apple exercise, is there really an 'apple' here or only color and shape and a thought about 'apple'?
Can an actual 'apple' be found in direct experience?

While thoughts or descriptions are known, what they talk about can't be found in direct experience.


Please play around with this exercise with any other object you care to choose and let me know if this is now clear.

Warmly,

Rowena

[Noro]

Glen, Ooops..sorry for calling you Gary !!!

[gagliano1770]

Dear Rowena,

Thanks for your reply.

So, one does not override the other in importance, they work together once the illusion is seen that there is no separate entity running the show. Is this clear for you now?

Yes, I feel more comfortable with this concept now.

So, as you do this apple exercise, is there really an 'apple' here or only color and shape and a thought about 'apple'?
Can an actual 'apple' be found in direct experience?

No. It's as you say: the color and form and a thought.

Please play around with this exercise with any other object you care to choose and let me know if this is now clear.

Yes, I've got it.

Thank you,
Glen

[Noro]

Hi Glen,

I'm glad that all makes sense to you now. It is important for the mind to be on board. We are not trying to get rid of it, only to make it more skillful at discerning the difference between what is actual (Direct Experience) and what is conceptual, i.e. interpretation.

EXPLORE THE SENSE OF SELF:
The difference in feeling something to be true and seeing that it is or isn't.

Let’s say that you have lost your keys and you swear that you left them in your coat. You go to look and check all the pockets - the keys are not there. You swear they must be as that was the last place you remember them. You have a vivid memory of putting them there after you left the house. But when you check they are not there.

At this point you can keep on believing that the keys are in your pocket, or you can admit that even if they were, they are no longer there now.

The sense of self is just like that. You may see clearly that the self is an illusion but still feel a sense of self - just like the keys.

Feeling something to be true and "seeing that it is not" are not the same. (Remember the Coloured Socks Example!)
For a start, feelings, i.e. body sensations do not talk!

Now I'd like you to explore this "sense of self" very thoroughly, not by thinking about it but be LOOKING FOR IT. There might be a familiar sensation that we label a sense of self, but can an actual self be found? Keep the focus of attention on this sense of self and answer each question separately and feel free to answer with a simple yes or no when appropriate:

Does this sense of self have a specific location? Yes/No
If Yes, is it permanently fixed, or does it move around and come and go?
Does this sense of self have a shape or a size? Yes/No
Does this sense of self say or communicate anything? Yes/No
If the answer is yes, how does it do this?
Does this sense of self have any specific characteristics or attributes (shimmering, tingling, pulsing, contraction?
What is this sense of self made of? An image? Sound? Taste? Smell? Body Sensation? Thought?
Does this familiar "sense of self" confirm the existence of an actual self. Yes/No
In conclusion, is there any separate self to be found from a sense of self?

And as always, if you have any points that you would like to discuss, please feel free to share them.

Warmly,

Rowena

[gagliano1770]

Dear Rowena,

Thank you.

Does this sense of self have a specific location? Yes/No

No.

Does this sense of self have a shape or a size? Yes/No

No.

Does this sense of self say or communicate anything? Yes/No

Yes.

If the answer is yes, how does it do this?

Through sensations in the body.

Does this sense of self have any specific characteristics or attributes (shimmering, tingling, pulsing, contraction?

No.

What is this sense of self made of? An image? Sound? Taste? Smell? Body Sensation? Thought?

It's not made of anything.

Does this familiar "sense of self" confirm the existence of an actual self. Yes/No

No.

In conclusion, is there any separate self to be found from a sense of self?

No. How would I even tell?

Thanks again,
Glen

[Noro]

Hello Glen,

Lets look at this a bit closer in direct experience.

Does this sense of self say or communicate anything? Yes/No

Yes.

If the answer is yes, how does it do this?

Through sensations in the body.

The two previous questions were: Does this sense of self have a specific location, or shape or size and you answered "No" to both those questions. Then you were asked later on whether this sense of self confirmed the existence of an actual self and again you answered "No".

So if there is no actual self to be found out of something labelled 'sense of self', IN YOUR DIRECT EXPERIENCE, can you confirm that this so called 'sense of self' actually communicates anything?

IN YOUR DIRECT EXPERIENCE can you confirm that even if attention was drawn to sensations in the body, can sensations, in themselves actually communicate anything?

Can sensations in the body speak, hear, smell, taste or touch?

Without the interpretation of thought, can sensations be or do anything at all other than be sensations arising?

In conclusion, is there any separate self to be found from a sense of self?

No. How would I even tell?

Exactly!

This is not to say that from the relative perspective we do not interpret body sensations, and we can say that the body speaks to us when we say things like "I am tired", "I am upset", "I am bored", thoughts/mind, are always on the alert to interpret what is going on in both our inner and outer environment and 'speaking' on behalf of the body when there are sensations to be interpreted. BUT THE SENSATIONS IN THEMSELVES ARE JUST THERE TO BE FELT, interpretation arises, and most of the time interpretation by thought removes us from being present with sensations and takes us off into stories about the sensations and more stories about the stories, thoughts upon thoughts and so on. I hope this is clear?


A CONTEMPLATION ABOUT TIME
Time is an experience, it is not fundamental

There is a general assumption that there is linear time that started (if started at all) somewhere very far in the past and advances to the distant future. The present moment (now) is considered to be a very small fragment of time, or an event that is moving forward on a linear line, coming from the past and advancing to the future.

Take a few deep breaths to relax and then look in direct experience and answer the following according to your actual findings, NOT thoughts about your findings:

Is there an experience of the ’now’ moving along a line of time?

An experience of one ‘moment’ giving way to the next?

Is there any actual or direct experience of one event following another?

How fast is the ‘present moment’ actually moving?

Just look at 'this moment', can you find a point where it began?

How long does the ‘now’ last?

Where does the ‘now’ start, and where does it end?

When does the ‘now’ exactly become the 'past'?

What is the ‘past’ in actual experience?

So is there actual experience of ‘time’ or simply thoughts about ‘time’?


One other thing, for the purposes of the efficacy of this inquiry, it is much better to keep a good rhythm going between the questions I send out and your replies. Is there a particular reason that causes a delay of a few days answering? Are you finding this process satisfying or not? I would love to get your feedback. Thanks in advance.

Warm wishes,

Rowena