Clearly seeing through the illusion

[CommonTrap26]

Hey Rali,

I have continued looking today using DE/AE. This has been an enjoyable experience and seems to be becoming a habit to look in this manner automatically.

Thank You,

Thomas

[poppyseed]

Hey Thomas,
Good. Let’s stay with this a little longer and look at attention itself.

It appears that images slowly come into focus at first. Kind of seems like there is a seeing of abstract color or light and then that is labeled as something and is then formed into an image thought.

In and out of focus. Like once they have attention they start to break down again

Look directly. 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.
Can the thing called “attention”/”focus” be found?
Does attention have a shape, location, or boundary?
Can you see anything moving from one image to another, or from one thought to another?
Or is one image simply appearing, then another image is simply appearing, and thought says, “Attention moved from this image to that image”?
Can you choose what will be noticed next?
Sit quietly for a few minutes. Notice sounds, sensations, colours, and thoughts.
What decides which one becomes clear? Is there an entity moving it? Do you move it?
Can you decide what it will land on next? Or does a sound, sensation, image, or thought simply become prominent, and afterward thought says, “attention moved there”?
Hold focus on breath - see how focus moves to thoughts, sensations, feelings, sounds.
Is this something you control? Is there anything more than sensation + thought that says “I’m doing this”?
What is looking/noticing/attention made of? There is what IS happening and the description of it.
Try this now. Sit quietly and notice what becomes prominent next. A sound may stand out. Then a sensation. Then an image. Then a thought.
Was there a controller choosing the sequence?
Could the next focus be known before it happened?
Now look at the labels themselves. “Sensation,” “seeing,” and “thought” are useful words for describing experience.
But are three separate things actually found?
At this moment, can a boundary be found where seeing ends and sensation begins?
Can a boundary be found where sensation ends and thought begins?
Or are those divisions added afterward by thought for the sake of describing what happened?

Take your time with this. Please answer each question individually using the quote function, and stay with what is directly found rather than explaining how attention works.

And finally:

What are you, when you don't think about what you are?

The experience of the senses and thoughts

Be careful here. “The experience of the senses and thoughts” can very easily become a new answer — a new description of “me.” Don’t replace “I am Thomas” with “I am experience.”
Right now, notice a sound.
Is there sound plus an entity having the sound?
Notice a sensation.
Is there sensation plus an entity receiving the sensation?
Notice a thought.
Is there thought plus something separate that owns or experiences it?
Don’t look for a better definition of yourself. Just check whether the extra entity that the word “I” seems to refer to can actually be found anywhere in experience.
What is found?

Love
Rali

[CommonTrap26]

Hello Rali,

Can the thing called “attention”/”focus” be found?

No there is not a thing call attention/focus

Does attention have a shape, location, or boundary?

No it does not have a shape, location, or boundary

Can you see anything moving from one image to another, or from one thought to another?

No there is no thing moving from one image to another

Or is one image simply appearing, then another image is simply appearing, and thought says, “Attention moved from this image to that image”?

Correct, images appear and another image appears but there is no movement between them. thought claims movement but nothing has moved.

Can you choose what will be noticed next?

No, when something is noticed the thought of direction comes after the noticing.

Sit quietly for a few minutes. Notice sounds, sensations, colours, and thoughts.
What decides which one becomes clear?

Nothing is deciding.

Is there an entity moving it?

There is not an entity moving it

Do you move it?

There is not an entity moving it

Can you decide what it will land on next?

No

Or does a sound, sensation, image, or thought simply become prominent, and afterward thought says, “attention moved there”?

This is the case

Hold focus on breath - see how focus moves to thoughts, sensations, feelings, sounds.

Is this something you control?

No the focus moves on its own

Is there anything more than sensation + thought that says “I’m doing this”?

No first the sensation and then the thought

What is looking/noticing/attention made of?

I do not know. Does not seem to be made of anything

There is what IS happening and the description of it.

Yes this is apparent and it is seen to be the case.

Try this now. Sit quietly and notice what becomes prominent next. A sound may stand out. Then a sensation. Then an image. Then a thought.

Was there a controller choosing the sequence?

No controller. The sequence moves on its own. Then a thought to say it moved it or to explain that it moved because of x reason.

Could the next focus be known before it happened?

No it was a surprise at each focus change.

Now look at the labels themselves. “Sensation,” “seeing,” and “thought” are useful words for describing experience.

But are three separate things actually found?

No

At this moment, can a boundary be found where seeing ends and sensation begins?

No

Can a boundary be found where sensation ends and thought begins?

No

Or are those divisions added afterward by thought for the sake of describing what happened?

The divisions are added

Right now, notice a sound.
Is there sound plus an entity having the sound?

No there is only the hearing

Notice a sensation.
Is there sensation plus an entity receiving the sensation?

No there is only the feeling

Notice a thought.
Is there thought plus something separate that owns or experiences it?

No the thought is not separate from the experience

Don’t look for a better definition of yourself. Just check whether the extra entity that the word “I” seems to refer to can actually be found anywhere in experience.
What is found?

No extra entity can be found anywhere in experience. There is no solid anything. There seems to be only space

[poppyseed]

Hello Thomas,
There’re a couple of subtle things to look at here.

No the focus moves on its own

The divisions are added

Good. Stay right there.
Without the labels “sound”, “sensation”, “seeing”, “thought” — are separate things actually found?
Or is there simply what is happening/just THIS, and thought later divides it up and names parts of it?

Without the labels there is just THIS. In Buddhism the term “suchness” or “thusness” (whatever is happening) is used, referring to the nature of reality free from conceptual elaborations and the subject–object distinction. I like the word “THIS” as it is more like a pointing word – pointing to whatever is directly experienced like an arrow with no extra meaning – rather than labelling the experience.

Now look at what we have been calling “focus” or “attention”.
If there are no separate things prior to thought labelling them, is there really a focus moving from one separate thing to another? Or one thing replacing another?
Or does what is happening simply vary in intensity or prominence, and thought describes those peaks afterwards as: “attention moved to the sound”/ “attention shifted to the sensation” / “now there is a thought”
It's like looking at a lava lamp. The wax may seem to change shape, and the shapes it seems to take may seem to be present one moment, and absent the next. But all that is known is the wax. Nothing actually changed and nothing was ever born or lost, although it may have seemed to. All that is known is THIS - nothing can be added to it, nor taken away.
Look directly.
Can an actual boundary be found between one “thing” and another? Can an actual movement of attention be found? Or is all of that part of the description added by thought?
So rather than there being separate objects plus attention travelling among them, is it closer to say that there is simply what is happening — with thought carving it into apparent parts and narrating changes in prominence?
Don’t adopt that as an answer. Check it.
What is actually found before the labels arrive?

There is no solid anything. There seems to be only space

Careful with “space”. Look now.
Is “space” actually found?
Does it have a shape? A boundary/edge? A location? A substance? How big is it? Is there distance between the center and the edge?
Or is “space” another word thought is using to describe the absence of anything solid being found?
Stay with what is directly experienced.

Love
Rali

[CommonTrap26]

Hello Rali,

Without the labels “sound”, “sensation”, “seeing”, “thought” — are separate things actually found?

No

Or is there simply what is happening/just THIS, and thought later divides it up and names parts of it?

This is the correct case

If there are no separate things prior to thought labelling them, is there really a focus moving from one separate thing to another?

No, there is no movement

Or one thing replacing another?

No there are no separate things

Or does what is happening simply vary in intensity or prominence, and thought describes those peaks afterwards as: “attention moved to the sound”/ “attention shifted to the sensation” / “now there is a thought”

There are variations in intensity and prominence but these are not separations but textures of THIS. The only separation happens in the labels and commentary of thought.

Can an actual boundary be found between one “thing” and another?

No, there seem to be boundaries between things but they are only variations in colors or pitch/volume of sound. All of THIS is the same medium.

Can an actual movement of attention be found?

No actual movement of attention can be found.

Or is all of that part of the description added by thought?

The seeming movement is part of the description/narrative but is not actual found.

So rather than there being separate objects plus attention travelling among them, is it closer to say that there is simply what is happening — with thought carving it into apparent parts and narrating changes in prominence?

Yes this is more accurate. There is what is happening. After the fact the thoughts divide it into apparent parts and fit it into a narrative.

What is actually found before the labels arrive?

Happening is found before it is labeled. THIS is HAPPENING before the limitations of labels and descriptions are added.

There is no solid anything. There seems to be only space. Careful with “space”. Look now.
Is “space” actually found?

No

Does it have a shape?

No

A boundary/edge?

No

A location?

No

A substance?

No

How big is it?

Endless and intimate. There is no measurement

Is there distance between the center and the edge?

No center or edge

Or is “space” another word thought is using to describe the absence of anything solid being found?

Space in this instance is being used to describe the absence of anything solid being found.

[poppyseed]

Hello Thomas,
Good. This is very clear.
There are just a couple of phrases I want you to look at rather than turn into conclusions. You might be using these symbolically, but thought has a way of turning abstractions into things

All of THIS is the same medium.

Can a “medium” actually be found? Or is “same medium” another description thought adds to the absence of real separation?

Endless and intimate.

Look carefully.
Is “endless” actually experienced?
Is “intimate” actually experienced?
Or are those also words arriving afterward to describe what cannot be divided into center/edge, here/there, inside/outside?
Don’t replace “self” with “THIS”, “space”, “oneness”, “medium”, or anything else.

Let’s have a look at the idea of control, choice and decisions. Please explore the exercises below and report your findings! Remember that we’re looking for some kind of entity, a something, an ‘I’ which is doing the ‘choosing’. Sometimes we describe this sense of choosing as a ‘feeling’: It feels like ‘I’ did the ‘choosing’, but remember we are not interested in “seems like” and “feels like” entities, but ones that could be described.
seems like/feels like = thought content
Nothing in DE is seems or feels like – it’s either here or not :)

1. Hold a hand in front of you; palm turned down. Now turn the palm up. And down...and up and so on.
How is the movement controlled?
Does a thought control it?
Can a ‘controller’ or and entity that is choosing be located?
How is the decision made to turn the hand over?
Track any decision point when a thought MADE THE DECISION to turn the hand over.

2. Put two objects that you like in front of you (e.g. a cup of coffee and a glass of juice)
Step1. 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.
Step2. Count to 5.
Step3. Choose one of the drinks. Pick it up and take a sip.

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 an entity doing the ‘choosing’?

In step 3 where you made a choice, did anything arise that announced, ‘I am the chooser’? If so, what does it look like?

3. Please take me through a biggish decision that you made recently - not something very personal so you are able to share more details about your decision making...

How did it come to be? Consider all of the conditions that were necessary for it to happen. If any one of those conditions were different, would the outcome have been the same? How many of these conditions were outside of your influence? What was in your control (according to thought)?

Please take your time with each exercise! Repeat as many times as you need and then write the answers for all of them. Watch like a hawk. Don't go to thoughts, examine the actual experience. Do this as many times as you like, and each time inquire with the questions.
Love
Rali

[CommonTrap26]

Hello Rali,

All of THIS is the same medium.

Can a “medium” actually be found? Or is “same medium” another description thought adds to the absence of real separation?

No medium can be found. This is a description of the singularity of THIS.

Endless and intimate.
Look carefully.
Is “endless” actually experienced?

No end or edge is experienced, but endlessness itself is also not experienced

Is “intimate” actually experienced?

Intimate is not experienced.

Or are those also words arriving afterward to describe what cannot be divided into center/edge, here/there, inside/outside?

These are descriptions that come on after experience

1. Hold a hand in front of you; palm turned down. Now turn the palm up. And down...and up and so on.
How is the movement controlled?

Not sure how it is controlled

Does a thought control it?

No a thought does not control it

Can a ‘controller’ or and entity that is choosing be located?

No controller can be located

How is the decision made to turn the hand over?

The intention was set while reading the instructions. The actual motion and time was spontaneous.

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

The thoughts did not make the hand move. In each instance it was seen that the hand moved and then a thought said up or down. There were thoughts at times before the hand moved that called for the flip action but the hand stayed still. The thoughts were either guessing when the motion would happen or commentating after the action took place.

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?

When thinking of the objects the qualities appeared by themselves. Preferences did manifest but they were not chosen. They just were already.

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?

When the counting was started the preference did drop into the background until counting was completed. No choice was made regarding the sequence of events.

Did you ‘choose’ to shut down the preferences to give way to the counting?

No choice was made to shut down the preferences for the counting.

Did you directly experience an entity doing the ‘choosing

No entity was experienced choosing.

In step 3 where you made a choice, did anything arise that announced, ‘I am the chooser’?

No

If so, what does it look like?

No chooser announced

3. Please take me through a biggish decision that you made recently - not something very personal so you are able to share more details about your decision making...

Bought a new car.

How did it come to be?

Our family vehicles were both becoming less reliable and we needed to ensure we had safe transportation for wife and kids.

Consider all of the conditions that were necessary for it to happen.

The need was present due to age of previous vehicles, recent breakdowns and approaching out of town engagement. In a position to be able to afford the new vehicle.

If any one of those conditions were different, would the outcome have been the same?

No

How many of these conditions were outside of your influence?

All honestly

What was in your control (according to thought)?

According to thought: the conditions were in my responsibility to have controlled. The previous vehicles should have been serviced more regularly to prevent the breakdowns. I had volunteered for the out of town engagement knowing the vehicles were not sound. I had worked very hard for the promotions that lead to being able to afford the vehicle. I chose the color and details of the vehicle

[poppyseed]

Hi Thomas
Good. The hand and drink exercises are showing this very clearly. There’s one phrase I want to look at more closely:

The intention was set while reading the instructions.

What exactly is this “intention”? Look directly.
Is intention something separate that can be found?
Does it have any power of its own?
When the thought or intention “turn the hand” appears, does the hand necessarily move?
You already noticed that sometimes a thought about flipping appeared and the hand remained still.
So can the thought or intention itself be said to cause the movement?
Look at the sequence very carefully… An instruction is read. Perhaps a thought appears. Perhaps something we call “intention” appears. At some point the hand moves.
Can an actual causal link between these be experienced? Or is thought saying afterward “the intention caused the movement”?
Try this deliberately. Form a very strong intention: “I am going to turn my hand now.” Then do nothing except watch.
Does the intention itself move the hand?
Now let the hand move whenever it moves.
At the exact moment movement begins, can you find anything that pushes, commands, or causes it?
Could intention (still thought) simply be another part of what is happening — just like any other thought, preference (also thought) and movement (sensations)?
Don’t take that as an answer. Check whether intention can actually be found doing anything.

According to thought: the conditions were in my responsibility to have controlled. The previous vehicles should have been serviced more regularly to prevent the breakdowns. I had volunteered for the out of town engagement knowing the vehicles were not sound. I had worked very hard for the promotions that lead to being able to afford the vehicle. I chose the color and details of the vehicle

This is where the sense of choice and control can become much more convincing. Look at that carefully.
Did you choose the thoughts, habits, priorities, finances, time pressures, knowledge and circumstances that led to how often the vehicles were serviced?
Could a different servicing history have happened unless different conditions had been present?
At the moment that volunteering happened, can you find a separate chooser that created the intention to volunteer? Or did reasons, preferences, circumstances and intention appear, followed by the action?
Did you choose the reasons that made volunteering seem worthwhile?
Was the capacity and inclination to work hard chosen?
Were your abilities, upbringing, opportunities, motivation, fears, ambitions, workplace circumstances and the decisions of the people who promoted you chosen?
Could “working hard” have happened exactly as it did without all of those conditions?
Did you choose which colours you liked? Did you choose the preferences for particular features?
Did you choose what was available at the dealership, what suited the family, what fitted the budget, or what seemed attractive at that moment?
At the exact point the colour was “chosen”, can you find an independent chooser apart from all those conditions?
Or was there preference + conditions + thought + action, and afterward the sentence: “I chose this”?

I just wanted an example of a decision that you would normally consider that you’ve made. The point was to look entirely in thought content where cause and effect “live” and see that even there there’s no “you” making a decision. It was just one event leading to another, leading to another, with “actions” based on previous conditioning. The thought “decision is made” is layered on top of other thoughts/beliefs/descriptions of what has happened before.
Why does the wind blow? It just blows. Yes we can say it happens as a result of previous events but there’s no entity “wind” that does the blowing. There is no wind that decides to blow. It’s just language.
What is “moving of the hands” in DE? We’ve seen that it’s just a sensation, labelled “hands moving” + colour/shape labelled “hands moving”.
So, what makes the sensations to appear? What makes seeing to appear? LOOK! Is there anything that causes anything to appear? Do cause and effect exist outside of thought content?
Thought comes to describe that things are happening and why they are happening, but in DE things are just happening.
Is the description/explanation/label needed for things to happen?

Please look at each of the pointers separately. I’m not asking you to adopt the idea that “there is no choice”. I’m asking you to find where, in an actual decision, an independently existing chooser enters the process.
Can one be found?

Love
Rali

[CommonTrap26]

Hey Rali,

There’s one phrase I want to look at more closely:
The intention was set while reading the instructions.
What exactly is this “intention”?

Intention is a thought and does not describe a separate thing or process. There is no actual intention or separate item that is the intention.

Look directly.
Is intention something separate that can be found?

No

Does it have any power of its own?

No

When the thought or intention “turn the hand” appears, does the hand necessarily move?

No, it is seen that the hand moves without thought or intention and does not move when the thought turn the hand appears.

So can the thought or intention itself be said to cause the movement?

No they are not causing the movement

Look at the sequence very carefully… An instruction is read. Perhaps a thought appears. Perhaps something we call “intention” appears. At some point the hand moves.
Can an actual causal link between these be experienced?

No there is no causal link.

Or is thought saying afterward “the intention caused the movement”?

Yes this is the case

Try this deliberately. Form a very strong intention: “I am going to turn my hand now.” Then do nothing except watch.
Does the intention itself move the hand?

No it does not

Now let the hand move whenever it moves.
At the exact moment movement begins, can you find anything that pushes, commands, or causes it?

No, there is not a cause that can be seen.

Could intention (still thought) simply be another part of what is happening — just like any other thought, preference (also thought) and movement (sensations)?

Yes, intention is another thought label for what is happening.

Did you choose the thoughts, habits, priorities, finances, time pressures, knowledge and circumstances that led to how often the vehicles were serviced?

No, none of these thoughts, habits, priorities, finances, time pressures, knowledge and circumstances that lead to the vehicle service schedule were chosen.

Could a different servicing history have happened unless different conditions had been present?

No, the service history could not have changed unless the variables listed had also changed.

At the moment that volunteering happened, can you find a separate chooser that created the intention to volunteer?

No, there was not a separate chooser that chose to volunteer.

Or did reasons, preferences, circumstances and intention appear, followed by the action?

Yes this is the case

Did you choose the reasons that made volunteering seem worthwhile?

No the reasons that made it seem worthwhile were based on previous conditioning and preferences.

Was the capacity and inclination to work hard chosen?

No these capacities and inclination are based on conditioning.

Were your abilities, upbringing, opportunities, motivation, fears, ambitions, workplace circumstances and the decisions of the people who promoted you chosen?

No, none of these factors were chosen.

Could “working hard” have happened exactly as it did without all of those conditions?

No, this could not have happened exactly as it did without these conditions.

Did you choose which colours you liked?

No

Did you choose the preferences for particular features?

No

Did you choose what was available at the dealership, what suited the family, what fitted the budget, or what seemed attractive at that moment?

No, these where not chosen

At the exact point the colour was “chosen”, can you find an independent chooser apart from all those conditions?

No, no independent chooser that is apart from these conditions

Or was there preference + conditions + thought + action, and afterward the sentence: “I chose this”?

This is the correct case.

What is “moving of the hands” in DE? We’ve seen that it’s just a sensation, labelled “hands moving” + colour/shape labelled “hands moving”.
So, what makes the sensations to appear?

Nothing can be found that makes the sensation appear.

What makes seeing to appear?

Nothing can be found that makes seeing appear.

LOOK! Is there anything that causes anything to appear?

No

Do cause and effect exist outside of thought content?

No

Thought comes to describe that things are happening and why they are happening, but in DE things are just happening.
Is the description/explanation/label needed for things to happen?

No, description/explanation/labeling occurs after things happen.

I’m asking you to find where, in an actual decision, an independently existing chooser enters the process.
Can one be found?

No chooser can be found. Things happen and then thought labels it.

[poppyseed]

Hey Thomas,
Good. This is very clear.
Let’s look at something that has been implicit in some of your answers: time and memory. You’ve referred to things such as previous conditioning, upbringing and past circumstances. So let’s check what the “past” actually is in direct experience.
Past and memory go hand-in-hand as a memory thought (words or mental images) is believed to be referring to something that has happened in the past. Memory thoughts are also thoughts about a future that may or may not happen based on past experiences. A future thought is a thought that projects an idea about a future based on past memory. The majority of us ‘live’ in past or future, but when are those seeming memory thoughts actually taking place?

Sit quietly somewhere for 10 or so minutes and watch the arising thoughts. Notice the thoughts that contain content that refer to a past or future. Please don’t go to thought explanation, but just look at what the direct actual experience is.

What is memory exactly? What is the memory ‘made of’?
Is there any difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘memory’ thought?
WHEN does the memory actually appear?
How is it known that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened?

Then, look at a thought about the future.
What is the future thought ‘made of’?
WHEN does the future thought appear?
Is there a difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘future’ thought?
How is it known that a ‘future’ thought refers to something that will happen?

Then let’s compare a thought about the past and a thought about the future. For example, remember having breakfast yesterday. Then imagine having breakfast tomorrow. Look only at what is actually appearing.
What is the difference between the thoughts about past and future in actual experience? If there is a difference, how is that difference known exactly? Can a past or future be known? Or all that is known are the thoughts labelled as ‘memory’ that are appearing now?

In actual experience: Where is last week? Where is yesterday? Where is this morning? Where is five minutes ago? Where is one minute ago? Where is 30s ago? Where is tomorrow morning? Where is next week? Where is next month?
Can you find any of these? Or only ‘memory’ thoughts about these appearing now?

Furthermore...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.

But is there an experience of the ’now’ moving along the line of time?
Any 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 thoughts about ‘time’?

Now return to “conditioning”. When a present preference arises and thought says: “This is because of my past conditioning”,
Is the past actually present causing the preference?
Can a memory reach out from the past and make anything happen now?
Or is there a present preference, a present thought or memory, and then an explanation connecting them into a story of cause and effect?
And finally, look at the sense of continuity called “Thomas”. Memories appear about childhood, yesterday, ten minutes ago.
Is there an actual continuous Thomas running through those memories?
Or are there memories appearing now, with thought linking them together and saying, “That was me”?
Please take these individually and use the quote function.
Stay with what can actually be found rather than what is known to be true conventionally.

Love
Rali

[CommonTrap26]

Hey Rali,

What is memory exactly?

Thought labeled as memory

What is the memory ‘made of’?

Thought

Is there any difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘memory’ thought?

No they are the same

WHEN does the memory actually appear?

It appears now

How is it known that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened?

Another thought labels the initial thought a memory

Then, look at a thought about the future.
What is the future thought ‘made of’?

Thought

WHEN does the future thought appear?

The future thought appears now

Is there a difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘future’ thought?

No they are the same

How is it known that a ‘future’ thought refers to something that will happen?

A second thought labels it as a future thought.

What is the difference between the thoughts about past and future in actual experience?

There is no difference in actual experience.

If there is a difference, how is that difference known exactly?

No difference is experienced

Can a past or future be known?

No

Or all that is known are the thoughts labelled as ‘memory’ that are appearing now?

This is the correct case

In actual experience: Where is last week?

Only in thought experienced now

Where is yesterday?

Only in thought experienced now

Where is this morning?

Only in thought experienced now

Where is five minutes ago?

Only in thought experienced now

Where is one minute ago?

Only in thought experienced now

Where is 30s ago?

Only in thought experienced now

Where is tomorrow morning?

Only in thought that is experienced now

Where is next week?

Only in thought that is experienced now

Where is next month?

Only in thought that is experienced now

Can you find any of these?

Only in thought

Or only ‘memory’ thoughts about these appearing now?

Only memory thoughts about these

But is there an experience of the ’now’ moving along the line of time?

There is not an experience of NOW moving

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

No there is just now

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

No there is not an experience of one event following another

How fast is the ‘present moment’ actually moving?

The present moment is not experienced as moving

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

No

How long does the ‘now’ last?

Not experienced as a start or end to now so could not make a statement of how long it lasts.

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

A start or end is not experienced in now

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

It does not become past

What is the ‘past’ in actual experience?

The past in AE is memory thoughts labeled as past

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

Time is not actually experienced. Memory thoughts of past or future are seen as the seeming experience of time

Now return to “conditioning”. When a present preference arises and thought says: “This is because of my past conditioning”,
Is the past actually present causing the preference?

No it is not present causing the preference

Can a memory reach out from the past and make anything happen now?

No memories are thoughts only and cannot make anything happen

Or is there a present preference, a present thought or memory, and then an explanation connecting them into a story of cause and effect?

This is the correct case

And finally, look at the sense of continuity called “Thomas”. Memories appear about childhood, yesterday, ten minutes ago.
Is there an actual continuous Thomas running through those memories?

No they are thoughts labeled as memories

Or are there memories appearing now, with thought linking them together and saying, “That was me”?

Yes this is the case. A thought pops up now and is then labeled as a memory. The memory thoughts are then linked by thought as That Was Me.

[poppyseed]

Hey Thomas,
Good. This is very clear. A small clarification - we are not denying functional time. Clocks, calendars, appointments, plans, and ordinary language are useful. We can say: “I worked yesterday”, “The meeting is tomorrow”, “The train leaves at five.” That is functional time (icon on your desktop)—practical communication and organisation. What we are examining is psychological time: the story that an actual past or future exists somewhere in experience, and that an “I”/”observer”/”awareness”/entity travels from one moment into another.
There’re a couple of phrases I want to look at closely:

No there is just now

Careful.
Can a thing called “now” actually be found?
Does “now” have a shape, boundary, duration, location, beginning or end?
Or is “now” another label thought uses when no past or future can actually be found?
So don’t replace the story of moving time with a new story of an eternal present. Look directly.

A thought pops up now and is then labelled as a memory. The memory thoughts are then linked by thought as That Was Me.

Look at that linking process very closely.
When a memory appears, is there anything in the memory itself that says: “This happened to Thomas”? Or does another thought add ownership?
Can an actual continuous Thomas be found connecting childhood, yesterday and this moment?
Or are there simply present thoughts which are then woven into a continuity story?
If the past, the future, and no continuous self can actually be found, then where exactly is the “me” that has been accumulating a life?
Look. Don’t answer philosophically.
Is there anything actual there apart from the present thoughts, sensations, images and labels?

Now let’s see where the illusion still feels sticky. What would you like to look at next?
Here are the usual places where “me” hides:
Others — family, boss, son, approval, conflict, being seen.
Space — here/there, inside/outside, body/world, distance.
Emotions — fear, guilt, shame, pride, hurt, irritation.
Responsibility — caring for your son, work, decisions, consequences.
Awakening itself — “am I getting it?”, “will it last?”, “I need to go deeper.”
Pick the one that feels most charged, most personal, or most unclear. Not the one that is most interesting intellectually.
The one that still feels like me.
Where is Thomas still hiding?

Love
Rali

[CommonTrap26]

Hey Rali,

There’re a couple of phrases I want to look at closely:
No there is just now
Can a thing called “now” actually be found?

No

Does “now” have a shape, boundary, duration, location, beginning or end?

No shape, boundary, duration, location, beginning or ending.

Or is “now” another label thought uses when no past or future can actually be found?

This is correct. It is a label.

A thought pops up now and is then labelled as a memory. The memory thoughts are then linked by thought as That Was Me.
Look at that linking process very closely.
When a memory appears, is there anything in the memory itself that says: “This happened to Thomas”?

No

Or does another thought add ownership?

It is a thought that adds the ownership

Can an actual continuous Thomas be found connecting childhood, yesterday and this moment?

No

Or are there simply present thoughts which are then woven into a continuity story?

There is just present thoughts

If the past, the future, and no continuous self can actually be found, then where exactly is the “me” that has been accumulating a life?

The me cannot be found

Look. Don’t answer philosophically.
Is there anything actual there apart from the present thoughts, sensations, images and labels?

No there is nothing apart from the present thoughts, sensations, images and labels.

What would you like to look at next?
Where is Thomas still hiding?

The Responsibility part is the most charged. There is a fear emotion but it seems to be mostly tied to responsibilities of family and work.

[poppyseed]

Hey Thomas
Good. Let’s go directly to the part that feels charged.

The Responsibility part is the most charged. There is a fear emotion but it seems to be mostly tied to responsibilities of family and work.

emotion = sensation + thought
Inquire into the sensation and ask if the sensation itself knows anything about ‘fear’.
Can you find anyone/anything IN the sensation itself, or BEHIND the sensation that is fearful? Now look at the thought that comes with it. Can you find anyone/anything in the WORD ‘fear’ that is fearful?
If you don’t think about it, do you know that this sensation is something called ‘fear’?
Is there any inherent fear in the sensation itself?
Whenever a strong emotion arrives, try and deconstruct it down to bodily sensations. That is to say, see that certain sensations tend to be labelled in certain ways, e.g. the thought label “fear” may be habitually applied to a knot-like sensation in the stomach area. “Anxiety” may be the thought label for trembling hands and nausea, etc.
Once you are at just raw sensation without the thoughts, allow the sensation all the space it needs without pushing it aside or judging it. Sensations come and then go. "Fear" has a purpose – to protect old ways, conditioning, beliefs, hopes - the survival of the imaginary self. Thoughts are self organising. They stick to each other like matching puzzle pieces (stories about stories). Anything new that comes along and does not match the pattern will be attempted to get rid of as it costs the system “energy” to rebuild it from scratch. So, obviously when threatened there will be fear and resistance involved. But once it is seen that there is nothing that needs protection, it falls away. Is there anything that needs protecting? Ultimately, a knot in the stomach is a knot in the stomach, and nothing more – not fear, and not a story about something that brings fear.
Whenever, fear or resistance appear it is an invitation yo have a proper look as there are false beliefs at play :)

When the word responsibility is read right now, what actually appears? Where is the charge felt in the body?
Before the story “family” or “work” is added, what is the raw sensation?
Stay with that for a moment.

Now look at what “responsibility” is actually referring to. A child needs something. A bill needs paying. Work needs to be done. Someone asks you a question. The car needs fuel. (maybe you can give me a particular example which feels quite charged at the moment to work with)
In any of those situations, is a separate “Thomas” required before responding can happen?
Or do circumstances appear, thoughts appear, concern appears, action appears?
Look at a recent example from family life. Something needed doing. At the exact point the response happened:
Was there a separate entity choosing to care?
Was there a controller making concern appear?
Was there a “Thomas” generating the appropriate response?
Or did the situation itself include concern, thought, movement and action?
Now check the fear underneath this:
If no separate self is in control, what exactly is feared will stop happening?
Will love disappear? Will care disappear? Will memory disappear? Will practical thinking disappear?
Will learned skills disappear? Will consequences disappear?
Look at what is actually here rather than imagining a future catastrophe. And one more thing:
Is responsibility itself something that can be found?
Or is it a label thought places over a collection of happenings — caring, remembering, planning, responding, consequences, agreements, duties?
There is no need to conclude “I am not responsible for anything.” That would just be another story. Look instead:
When action happens and consequences follow, is an independent controller anywhere in the process?
And despite that, does responding still happen?

When responsibility feels charged, notice whether thought is quietly creating a new version of Thomas: the Thomas who has “seen through the self”, the Thomas who now has to live correctly, the Thomas who must handle family and work from this new understanding… Look closely.
Is there actually a new and improved, awakened Thomas here who now has to take over the job of being responsible? Or is that just the old ownership story appearing in a slightly more spiritual form?
Family situations still happen. Work still happens. Bills still get paid. Responses still happen. Care still happens.
But is there an entity in the middle of all that who has to manage life correctly?
When the thought “Now that I see this, I still have to be responsible” appears, what is actually there?
A thought? A sensation? A bit of fear? Anything else?
Can a responsible Thomas be found?
Can an irresponsible Thomas be found?
Or are both just labels applied afterward to what is happening?
So don’t try to become a better version of Thomas. Just look at what is actually happening when responsibility seems to arise.

Love
Rali

[CommonTrap26]

Thanks Rali,

Can you find anyone/anything IN the sensation itself, or BEHIND the sensation that is fearful?

No, nothing about the sensation is fearful

Now look at the thought that comes with it. Can you find anyone/anything in the WORD ‘fear’ that is fearful?

No, the word fear is not fearful

If you don’t think about it, do you know that this sensation is something called ‘fear’?

No, it is not something called fear without thinking about it

Is there any inherent fear in the sensation itself?

No

Is there anything that needs protecting?

No there is not anything that needs protecting

When the word responsibility is read right now, what actually appears?

Thoughts regarding responsibilities

Where is the charge felt in the body?

It is sensation felt in the chest and back of the neck

Before the story “family” or “work” is added, what is the raw sensation?

The raw sensation is a clinching (thought label) or bracing (thought label) of the chest and neck

In any of those situations, is a separate “Thomas” required before responding can happen?

No a separate “Thomas” is not required for responses to happen

Or do circumstances appear, thoughts appear, concern appears, action appears?

This is the correct case

Look at a recent example from family life. Something needed doing. At the exact point the response happened:
Was there a separate entity choosing to care?

No

Was there a controller making concern appear?

No

Was there a “Thomas” generating the appropriate response?

No the appropriate response was generated without a Thomas

Or did the situation itself include concern, thought, movement and action?

This is the correct case.

Now check the fear underneath this:
If no separate self is in control, what exactly is feared will stop happening?

The seeming fear is based on a thought story that with no separate self in control then something will be missed and someone will suffer for it.

Will love disappear?

No

Will care disappear?

No

Will memory disappear?

No

Will practical thinking disappear?

No

Will learned skills disappear?

No

Will consequences disappear?

No

Is responsibility itself something that can be found?

No responsibility cannot be found. It is a thought label

Or is it a label thought places over a collection of happenings — caring, remembering, planning, responding, consequences, agreements, duties?

Yes this is the case

When action happens and consequences follow, is an independent controller anywhere in the process?

No independent controller in the process

And despite that, does responding still happen?

Yes it does

Is there actually a new and improved, awakened Thomas here who now has to take over the job of being responsible?

No

Or is that just the old ownership story appearing in a slightly more spiritual form?

This is the case

But is there an entity in the middle of all that who has to manage life correctly?

No

When the thought “Now that I see this, I still have to be responsible” appears, what is actually there?
A thought?

Yes a thought

A sensation?

Yes a sensation

A bit of fear?

Yes a label thought to connect the original thought and sensation into a bit of fear

Anything else?

No

Can a responsible Thomas be found?

No

Can an irresponsible Thomas be found?

No

Or are both just labels applied afterward to what is happening?

This is the case. It is just labels