A quick jog through the gate.

[Walbart]

From my perspective (and again, when I say "my perspective" I don't literally mean it is "mine"... I just have a conditioned aversion to say "from the perspective here" ;P )

I totally understand, so don't worry about language getting in the way here. I'm on it.

"That which these words are pointing to" is what is witnessing "this"

Well....actually.....no. There is the vantage point of experience, which IS limited to Carson's body & mind. But there is no "witnesser". There is just the objects and the space which contains them, which isn't "you". You are simply tagging a label onto everything and calling it "me".

It is not limited to the perspective from my/this body

It is. You are a slab of meat that has the capacity to think and store experiences. This includes imagination which can be VAST. But that's all it is. We need to strip this back to your direct experience. You still keep identifying with space or emptiness. There IS space and emptiness, but it ISN'T you. Why would it need to be you? Ignore slipperiness of language, which is fair enough, you say you are unbounded...

I agree that the awareness that it is all arising and dissolving within is not "mine," but from my perspective it *is* "me"... and "you" and all of "us." It is everything. It is all there is

How about there is unbounded, but it isn't you. There is LIFE and EVERYTHING yes, but every time you tell me it's you or your perspective this is wrong. There is no room for you. There is no this and that, you and it, your perspective, my perspective. And awareness isn't a thing in which everything arises. Awareness is an action, it's when a conscious brain/sense organ process is functioning.

Again, look at direct experience now. Where is the "you" in any of it? Just look, nothing else. Any thought is an object. Feel the emptiness behind it all. It's empty, as in "nothing". Not some mystical awareness/being/consciousness. Nothing. Not you. Not big true you self. Nothing. Sensations and experience come in through the door of the body, which is amazing. Any sense of witnessing or observer is just the body being alive and aware. There is nothing behind you.

Carson, until you come out from behind this mask of I AM THAT, I AM EVERYTHING, we're not going to make much progress. Be it big you or small you, YOU are thoughts. Any idea you have about this is false. Any idea about being the ground of being, or background to life, or EVERYTHING, is false. You aren't anything, "you" are a concept. The body dies and this node of life stops experiencing and YOU will not outlive it. Nothing of you will remain, and this includes any sense of "me" or awareness. You are right, there IS life and everything happening, but there just isn't anything else, or anything it's happening to.

There is the feeling of beingness, and then the labelling of "me". It's a thought. Regardless of how big or grand a concept it may be.

Ask yourself, what if there really is no me at all anywhere?

[Walbart]

There could be a case made that ultimately there are no objects either. ;)
The "separation" between "me" and the "objects of perception" that I've talked about is not ultimately real

Yes, exactly. The separation is not ultimately real because there is no separation. There isn't a you to be separate from anything.

I guess I am here looking to deepen past the point of "discrimination" (I am not this, not this, not this... the whole "neti neti" thing) into the full experience of 24/7 unity.... where I am experientially everything and nothing simultaneously

This is one of your expectations that we spoke about earlier, thank you for being honest. Imagine for a second that what this forum and lots of other people talk about is true, that there is no you, no small self, no true/big/ultimate self. How does the idea that you could be "experientially everything and nothing" fit in with this?

[Walbart]

Carson, you ok?

[CarsonZi]

Hi Walbart :)

Yes, I am okay :)

Sorry for the delayed response, but in general I don't use electronics or do much, if any, writing on the weekends. Weekends for me are time to spend with my family and in as much physical activity as possible... it helps to keep the (kundalini) energy grounded and is part of how I maintain balance between "human nature" and "divine nature." Will respond in full hopefully sometime tomorrow. Thank you very much for checking up on me though. I appreciate it.

Much Love!
Carson :)

[Walbart]

Good good.

Maybe when you're back we can talk more about this human v's divine nature. Sounds like more spiritual sci-fi to me ;)

Talk soon.

WB.

[CarsonZi]

Hi Walbart and sorry for the delayed response. Thanks for being patient with me. :)

There is the vantage point of experience, which IS limited to Carson's body & mind. But there is no "witnesser". There is just the objects and the space which contains them, which isn't "you". You are simply tagging a label onto everything and calling it "me".

You are right in that I am simply tagging a label onto everything and calling it "me." But what makes you think that this is a problem? Is there potentially a belief being held onto that suggests that in order to be "liberated" one can not tag labels onto Life (even if it is just for the reason of making communication simpler)? Does calling something (in this case the space that Life is playing out in) "me" always necessarily indicate that there a sense of identity lodged there or could it be possible that this is just used for the sake of convenience? How could you ever definitively know one way or the other?

Taking this one step further, is there a possibility that "the no-self state" is the beginning (and not the end) and that the "I am everything state" is a stage *past* the no-self state? Even just a possibility?

This part of our conversation reminds me of the following post by Jeff Foster (who, if you don't know him is one of the more famous living "Advaita gurus" out there right now);
“I am officially no longer an ‘Advaita teacher’ or ‘Nonduality teacher’ – if, indeed, I ever was one. Life cannot be put into words, and however beautiful the words of Advaita/Nonduality are, they must be discarded in the end. I could never claim to be any sort of authority on this stuff. I will continue to speak, to sing my song to those who are open to listening, but gone is the need to adhere to any tradition, to use ‘Advaita-speak’ to avoid real, authentic human engagement, to pretend that I am in any way more or less special than you, to kid you that I know more than you, to play the ‘teacher’ by refusing to meet you in the play, to stop listening to you because I see you as ‘still stuck in the dream’ or ‘still a person’. This message is about love, in the true sense of the word – otherwise it is simply nihilism masquerading as freedom. The ‘Advaita Police’ reply ‘Who cares?’ I say I do. I do.”
Taken from here: http://www.lifewithoutacentre.com/read/ ... teachings/

It is not limited to the perspective from my/this body

It is. You are a slab of meat that has the capacity to think and store experiences. This includes imagination which can be VAST. But that's all it is. We need to strip this back to your direct experience.

I'm sorry, but to try and disregard someone's experience because it doesn't align with yours or because you don't understand it or something is just ignorance (no offence meant). I have had direct experience with leaving my body and observing things that I couldn't possibly have seen and that have been verified by third (uninvolved) parties after the fact. I have actually lost friends over this because I have told them what I observed them doing (remotely) and they did not believe me and thought I was stalking or spying on them. This is simple "remote viewing" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_viewing) and/or astral traveling and even the US government has used this as a mode of intelligence gathering. To say that this isn't possible and is simply "imagination" is incorrect. I hope you can read between the lines here and understand that I am not saying this because I am offended that you don't believe me (I could really care less), I just think it's important to stay open and not disregard someone else's experience simply because you have no understanding of or personal experience with it.

You still keep identifying with space or emptiness. There IS space and emptiness, but it ISN'T you. Why would it need to be you? Ignore slipperiness of language, which is fair enough, you say you are unbounded...

Again, just because I call 'the space' "me" does not necessarily mean I am identified with it. Where is the line between language and identification? What is the definition of identification? To me, to be "identified" with something you have to *believe* you are whatever you are identified with right? I don't believe I am the space. I believe that I am the space as much as I believe I am everything else. What is the difference between believing you are everything and believing you are nothing? Are they not exactly the same thing from different perspectives? Two sides of the same coin?

I agree that the awareness that it is all arising and dissolving within is not "mine," but from my perspective it *is* "me"... and "you" and all of "us." It is everything. It is all there is

How about there is unbounded, but it isn't you. There is LIFE and EVERYTHING yes, but every time you tell me it's you or your perspective this is wrong. There is no room for you. There is no this and that, you and it, your perspective, my perspective. And awareness isn't a thing in which everything arises. Awareness is an action, it's when a conscious brain/sense organ process is functioning.

To me it is both... it is all me and none of it is me. There is no difference other than in perspective. There is no "me" as all phenomenon is empty of permanence, but it is also "all me" as there is ultimately no separation between anything and it is all one "unified field" or however you want to describe the undescribable. From the "ultimate perspective" you could call it all "me," you could call it all "not-me," or you could just be silent (which is probably closest to the Truth anyway ;) ). Ultimately all these words are just poetry though, and none of it is "Truth."

Again, look at direct experience now. Where is the "you" in any of it? Just look, nothing else. Any thought is an object. Feel the emptiness behind it all. It's empty, as in "nothing". Not some mystical awareness/being/consciousness. Nothing. Not you. Not big true you self. Nothing. Sensations and experience come in through the door of the body, which is amazing. Any sense of witnessing or observer is just the body being alive and aware. There is nothing behind you.

Who is it that "feels the emptiness?" Well, I do. What is "I"? I don't know. Or at least I can't put words to it. Can I find this "I"? No, not with any of the senses. But is there something that "feels the emptiness?" Yes. There is something that feels the emptiness and whatever that is is also "the emptiness." Whatever this is, is what I am. But again, please understand that just because I *say* this, does not mean I *believe* this or that there is identity lodged there. I know that *saying* am the emptiness and feeling that emptiness is not Truth. Being that "emptiness" is Truth. But again, saying that "being emptiness is Truth" is not Truth. Hopefully you can read between the lines here as we are right at the border of the limitations of language. ;)

Carson, until you come out from behind this mask of I AM THAT, I AM EVERYTHING, we're not going to make much progress.

We also have to drop the mask of "I am nothing." There is no difference between the mask of "I am everything" and "I am no-thing." They are both masks and neither are Truth. But just as you saying "I am no-thing" does not mean that you believe/identify with no-thing, me saying "I am every-thing" does not mean I believe/identify with every-thing. This is all just words pointing to a wordless Truth.

Be it big you or small you, YOU are thoughts. Any idea you have about this is false. Any idea about being the ground of being, or background to life, or EVERYTHING, is false. You aren't anything, "you" are a concept.

All ideas are false. Including the idea that you are nothing.

The body dies and this node of life stops experiencing and YOU will not outlive it.

I have no idea what happens after death, don't think you do either. ;)

Nothing of you will remain, and this includes any sense of "me" or awareness.

How could you possibly ever KNOW this? Have you died before and verified that nothing of "me" remains after death? Even the Buddha refused to comment on what happens after death as he said it was all speculation.

You are right, there IS life and everything happening, but there just isn't anything else, or anything it's happening to.

It could be said that Life is happening to itself. But, in essence, anything that is said is all poetry (as Benjamin Smyth would say ;) ) and none of it is Truth.

There is the feeling of beingness, and then the labelling of "me". It's a thought. Regardless of how big or grand a concept it may be.

I will be interested in hearing your answer to the "who is feeling the 'beingness?" question. :D

Ask yourself, what if there really is no me at all anywhere?

I have been asking myself this question all weekend and all that ever comes back is "well, then there is no me anywhere. *shrug* Guess I'll just continue on as is then." Not sure what I "should" be getting back or what should "change" once this is discovered/known. ;)

[quote="Walbart]

I guess I am here looking to deepen past the point of "discrimination" (I am not this, not this, not this... the whole "neti neti" thing) into the full experience of 24/7 unity.... where I am experientially everything and nothing simultaneously

This is one of your expectations that we spoke about earlier, thank you for being honest. Imagine for a second that what this forum and lots of other people talk about is true, that there is no you, no small self, no true/big/ultimate self. How does the idea that you could be "experientially everything and nothing" fit in with this?

Well, I have not read any of the other threads here on LU, so I don't know what others are saying here, but there is no "idea" that I am experientially both everything and nothing, this is just my way of verbalizing some of the experiences I have had. In the times when there has been complete ego dissolution here (absolutely no sense of "I") there has also been a sense of "it's all me" and this is the result of seeing through the veil of separation so-to-speak. When there is no "I-sense" there is no separation and everything is seen as the same (which could be termed as "me").... it's ALL "me." But again this doesn't mean that I believe that I am (or am identified with) the computer screen I am looking at, it's just a known fact that there is no separation. When speaking of this one could say that there is no "me" or that it is all "me." There is no difference. This, is the "experiencing of being both nothing and everything simultaneously."

Maybe when you're back we can talk more about this human v's divine nature. Sounds like more spiritual sci-fi to me.

What I meant when I said that I have to maintain balance between human and divine nature is that if I spend all my time working on seeing through the veil of separation (etc) that I become unbalanced. Forsaking my humanity for "spiritual evolution" causes me to "lose Presence".... For me, I can not "be here now" when there is not a balance between the amount of energy expended on "human stuff" (washing dishes, playing with my daughter, making food, shoveling my sidewalk, etc etc etc) as there is on "seeing through illusion." When that balance is off, my attention has a hard time being in the present moment. Perhaps that is "spiritual sci-fi" but for me it is essential to remain balanced and present.

Sorry for the dramatically long post... :D

Love!
Carson :)

[Walbart]

Hi Carson, there’s a lot to get through here but I’ll try to be brief. This isn’t really a discussion forum, it’s about direct pointing to the fact that you don’t exist, in any form.

Does calling something (in this case the space that Life is playing out in) "me" always necessarily indicate that there a sense of identity lodged there or could it be possible that this is just used for the sake of convenience? How could you ever definitively know one way or the other?

In language the words "me" and "I" point to an assumed self. So for the purpose of our conversation neither is useful. If you're telling me that you are LIFE or SPACE, this is identification on a grand scale. And it's wrong. Any identification is false, it doesn't matter what you choose to identify with, or how slippery you can use disclaimers within your choice of language. Without language even, thoughts of identification are also false. Any "sense of identity" is a lie. Just more thoughts going down.

Taking this one step further, is there a possibility that "the no-self state" is the beginning (and not the end) and that the "I am everything state" is a stage *past* the no-self state? Even just a possibility?

No self isn't a state, it's just about stopping in your tracks right now and seeing that you don't exist. It is just the beginning, but until you've seen it you're not at the beginning.

I know of Jeff Foster. Thanks for the quote. Call me cynical but I just see a new angle to market his (un)teaching...

I just think it's important to stay open and not disregard someone else's experience simply because you have no understanding of or personal experience with it.

Sorry if I've offended you here Carson, honestly I am. I cannot comment on your personal experiences, obviously. I was just trying to ground the conversation a little as this kind of direction is moving away from what we do here. I've been seeking for years and the main problem with having an open mind that I've found is that it lets all the shit in. This is from personal experience. Seeing no self is also about realizing the potency of thoughts and the mind, so I tend to discount anything that hasn't appeared in my direct experience. If you're saying that you know for sure that your experiences happened outside of imagination/mind then that is truly amazing. I'm a huge fan of the Robert A. Monroe books btw, and for the record I believe that was all in his mind ;) Since seeing that there is no self residing in or around this body, reincarnation, astral projection et al have become a little bit less plausible in my opinion. But, if anything is possible, so is imagination, synchronicity and coincidence.

Where is the line between language and identification? What is the definition of identification?

This doesn't matter as all identification is false. Any identification, whither language or image-based thought is wrong. It's just thought after thought. There can be no true identification whatsoever. It's just thoughts.
I AM THAT - just a thought.
I AM NOT THAT, I AM EVERYTHING - just a thought.
I WON'T USE LANGUAGE, BUT I FEEL I AM SPACE - just a feeling

What is the difference between believing you are everything and believing you are nothing?

Nothing, no difference, they are both just beliefs. Thought content. Mind crap.

There is no "me" as all phenomenon is empty of permanence, but it is also "all me" as there is ultimately no separation between anything and it is all one "unified field" or however you want to describe the undescribable

Unless this is in your direct experience then I'd leave this at the door.

Who is it that "feels the emptiness?" Well, I do. What is "I"? I don't know.

Does there have to be an "I" in order for emptiness to exist? Emptiness is, you aren't. You are not the emptiness, and not do you feel or experience it.

All ideas are false. Including the idea that you are nothing.

Brilliant. So why are you telling me so many of your ideas?

I have no idea what happens after death, don't think you do either.

Of course, but "no belief" here is better than some story, isn't it? Maybe I crossed a line trying to snap you out of this spiritual/divine mode for a second, but it's more beneficial to live life fully and not have hope for some dream afterwards. Hope is a story. A fiction.

I will be interested in hearing your answer to the "who is feeling the 'beingness?" question

Feelings arise, there doesn't need to be anyone at the receiving end. If you go to your bathroom now and look at your eyes in the mirror, they are seen, but by no one. There is just the seeing without any seer etc. So the feeling of beingness is there, it arises in the awareness of the body, mechanically, data input. There is the sensation of beingness within the body, but that's as far as you can take it, you can't say "I am feeling this being", it doesn't need any I.

there has also been a sense of "it's all me"

It's just a sense. As in, a thought or feeling. There is no you.

So, where do we go now? I think we should strip this back to the bone and stop waving rubber swords at each other. Outside of conceptual thought, what are you?

[Walbart]

That wasn't very brief...

[CarsonZi]

Hi Walbart :)

In language the words "me" and "I" point to an assumed self. So for the purpose of our conversation neither is useful. If you're telling me that you are LIFE or SPACE, this is identification on a grand scale. And it's wrong. Any identification is false, it doesn't matter what you choose to identify with, or how slippery you can use disclaimers within your choice of language. Without language even, thoughts of identification are also false. Any "sense of identity" is a lie. Just more thoughts going down.

How do you know I am identified with anything? (not saying I'm not, just asking how you could know)
This is why I asked about the line between language and identification. I could say I am this or that, but how could you ever KNOW that I am actually identified (meaning how could you know that I BELIEVE that I am that) and am not just using language in a way that makes it appear to you that I am.

No self isn't a state, it's just about stopping in your tracks right now and seeing that you don't exist. It is just the beginning, but until you've seen it you're not at the beginning.

I've experientially (as opposed to mentally/conceptually) seen that there is no-self many times before. But I've never had this last more than 3 days. Is LU and our conversation here capable of bringing me to a lasting 24/7 embodiment of this reality or is LU simply here to bring one to "the beginning" as you call it?

I know of Jeff Foster. Thanks for the quote. Call me cynical but I just see a new angle to market his (un)teaching...

Sure, but that wasn't the point of sharing that quote. The point of sharing that quote was to remind us both that this "no-self" stuff can easily slide into "nihilism masquarading as freedom" and to allude to the fact that I am not interested in that at all. :) I am interested in clarity... even if that means that I am only clear that I am confused. ;)

I just think it's important to stay open and not disregard someone else's experience simply because you have no understanding of or personal experience with it.

Sorry if I've offended you here Carson, honestly I am.

Hey man, no worries! :) I'm not (and wasn't) offended in the least. Like I said, you don't have to believe me and I don't care if you do or you don't. I know that these types of experiences are not something I could (or would want to) prove to you are possible. Hell, I know that levitation is possible, but I'm not interested in proving that to anyone either. ;) Just reminding you not to blow off another's experience simply because it's not something you have experienced yourself. If you can dream it, it is possible. Limitless possibility here in Life. To put a box around what you believe is possible is like trying to dictate to Life what it can and can't do. I prefer to stay humble and in awe of how Life chooses to operate... even if that means blowing my petty little beliefs outta the water. ;)

Seeing no self is also about realizing the potency of thoughts and the mind, so I tend to discount anything that hasn't appeared in my direct experience.

Thoughts and the mind only hold as much potency as you allow them to.

If you're saying that you know for sure that your experiences happened outside of imagination/mind then that is truly amazing. I'm a huge fan of the Robert A. Monroe books btw, and for the record I believe that was all in his mind ;) Since seeing that there is no self residing in or around this body, reincarnation, astral projection et al have become a little bit less plausible in my opinion. But, if anything is possible, so is imagination, synchronicity and coincidence.

I know that the experiences I was talking about happened outside of imagination and so do a few others who were (indirectly) involved. Several of those people want nothing to do with me now though (understandably).

I have no idea who Robert Monroe is/was, sorry. :)

This doesn't matter as all identification is false. Any identification, whither language or image-based thought is wrong. It's just thought after thought. There can be no true identification whatsoever. It's just thoughts.
I AM THAT - just a thought.
I AM NOT THAT, I AM EVERYTHING - just a thought.
I WON'T USE LANGUAGE, BUT I FEEL I AM SPACE - just a feeling

Sure. But how do you KNOW I (or anyone) am identified? How do I KNOW you aren't? (I don't care if you are or aren't though, just so we're clear ;) ). I agree with everything you said above, I just think that it's very easy to "land" on the belief that "I am no-thing," or "there is no-self." These are still just beliefs until they are experientially verified. For me, I have experienced both "no-self" as well as "all self." Which is more true? I say they are both the same. They sure FELT the same (regardless of any labels put on the experiences) and in fact they have both happened at the same time. During these experiences (especially the short, climactic ones) there is no ability to talk anyway... langugage was completely lost/unknown.... so, there was no ability to label the experiences until they were over.

What is the difference between believing you are everything and believing you are nothing?

Nothing, no difference, they are both just beliefs. Thought content. Mind crap.

Perfect! :D So, what is the difference between the experience of being everything and the experience of being nothing? In *my* experience, nothing.... they are the same.

There is no "me" as all phenomenon is empty of permanence, but it is also "all me" as there is ultimately no separation between anything and it is all one "unified field" or however you want to describe the undescribable

Unless this is in your direct experience then I'd leave this at the door.

This has been my direct experience. Is it in this moment? No. Is this (the 24/7 embodiment of the reality of the unification of All) what I am hoping to get out of our conversation? Yes. :)

Does there have to be an "I" in order for emptiness to exist? Emptiness is, you aren't. You are not the emptiness, and not do you feel or experience it.

The reason I said that was because you asked me to "Feel the emptiness behind it all".... and I was wondering exactly who would be feeling the emptiness? It seems to be a bit of a contradiction you asking me to feel the emptiness but then to say that you do not "feel or experience" the emptiness. I understand that "there is only the experiencing and that there is no actually experiencer" but I repeatedly said that I prefer to speak in first person as I have a conditioned aversion to speaking in "advaitic third person." Please try to keep that in mind as you read my posts. ;)

I said: All ideas are false. Including the idea that you are nothing.

You said: Brilliant. So why are you telling me so many of your ideas?

I haven't been speaking mostly of ideas. I've mostly been speaking of what has been experienced.

Of course, but "no belief" here is better than some story, isn't it? Maybe I crossed a line trying to snap you out of this spiritual/divine mode for a second, but it's more beneficial to live life fully and not have hope for some dream afterwards. Hope is a story. A fiction.

Cross as many lines as you like Mr. Walbart. But I don't believe that you have no beliefs. Hahahaha ;P Hahaha, that was a joke as much as it was serious. :D

Feelings arise, there doesn't need to be anyone at the receiving end.

I fully understand and have experience with this (not sure if I need to continue to make mention of the difference between conceptual understanding and an embodied understanding, but for whatever reason I feel the need to be as thourough as possible here). What I am looking for here, is a 24/7 embodied experience of the "there is no one on the receiving end." But even as I type that sentence I am seeing that this embodied knowing will never stick around 24/7 forever. It will be known, and then we go back to being just as human as we always have been. We start off as conditioned children, mistakenly identified with the body and the collection of "I am" thoughts, then (eventually) we see that this was false, that there is "no real self," and then we go back to being just as human as we've always been juts minus the false identification with our "I-thoughts" etc. The "no-self" reality has been known here (there I go, speaking in Advaitic Third Person again ;) ), and I actually *don't* want to stay there (despite what I said just 2 or 3 sentences ago).... I feel that would be going backwards at this point. :)

So, where do we go now? I think we should strip this back to the bone and stop waving rubber swords at each other. Outside of conceptual thought, what are you?

I like my rubber sword... her name is "Fuckin' EH!!" (did I mention I'm Canadian? ;P ) Hahaha. Outside of conceptual thought I am something beyond words. That's all I got. ;D

Love ya man. Thanks for going through this with me and for all your patience and willingness to engage here. I truly appreciate and am enjoying this. :D

Carson :)

[Walbart]

Carson, you seem to know your shit and are very knowledgeable about the new age & non-duality scene. I admire that, so well done there. Personally, all that guff got me nowhere. None of it matters when you see how this all falls into place. Why would anyone need any of it if they don't even f**king exist? With respect.

Now, stop asking me questions. I don't need to be reminded about beliefs and no self and whatever. You're the one here looking for something. I'm good.

24/7 abiding non-dual awareness is an expectation you have about this because you've heard people talk about it. I don't know if this is even possible, the whole awakening thing is a process IMHO. Who is there to even want the 24/7? It's just a thought.

You don't exist. If you've already seen this then you need to see it again, so keep looking. That's what this is about. Drop all your stories and beliefs about not having any beliefs and all that shit. Sit quietly and look. And I don't mean go into a nice gooey vegetative state of bliss. Just look and see if you can find a "you" in anything that arises.

If you can do this, (and you say you already have) then you can return to it every time. You can look at it 24/7/365 if you like and it'll still be the same. Emptiness behind your thoughts and a lack of anything you hold to be you. I know you'll once again deny any identification, but it's obviously still there if you're not seeing this. Drop everything and sit and look at the lack of any identification anywhere.

Answer this: Thoughts contain the sense of self. Is this true?

[CarsonZi]

Hi Walbart :)

Personally, all that guff got me nowhere.

Hahaha. *blush*
Sorry for all the verbal masturbation. ;)

Lets cut to the chase shall we. :D

I don't know anything at all. This entire existence, all of Life is a complete mystery to me. I basically operate on faith. Faith that whatever is happening, whatever I'm (and I don't feel the need to put 'I'm' in quotations ;) ) doing, is the right thing to do. I can relax around this more or less, and in varying degrees depending on the moment.

I'm not looking for anything here. I've come here to LU because a friend said he had found "liberation" at this website and I was interested in what that meant. I've run into a few of the people from this site on other internet forums (and enjoyed some wonderful conversations with them :) ) but I didn't decide to check it out over here until said friend mentioned it. But, as I've said in my original post and a few other posts mention, I'm only here out of curiosity, and with only the intent of having some fun conversation. :) I've said I had no expectations (you didn't believe me ;) ) but truly, the only thing I am looking for here is the same thing I'm looking for all of the time... a celebration of Life. :D If that doesn't "align" with what is happening here (as I mentioned, I haven't read any of the other threads in the interest of being as "fresh" as possible for our conversation), if I'm just wasting your time, well, I'm truly sorry. :)

I've had a great time. :D

With much love and respect,
Carson :)

[Walbart]

Hi Carson,

Before we continue I'll be honest with you, I'm new to this. After 15 years of reading the books, 3 years of meditating and then 6 months of looking into this no self thing, I was finally "liberated" at the end of November 2011. I don't know shit and I'm still trying to come to terms with what has happened. I'm more than willing to keep going with this, but you have to accept that this isn't about having a fun conversation and shooting the breeze about spiritual stuff.

I've experientially (as opposed to mentally/conceptually) seen that there is no-self many times before. But I've never had this last more than 3 days.

How can not having a self come and go? It's not an experience, you just don't actually have one. As in, YOU aren't there. YOU is all thoughts. If you've "experienced" or seen that there's no self, look at the truth of this and don't let the thoughts/beliefs come back. Name and shame any identification. I'll say it again: Carson's body is a piece of meat, a machine, and anything that goes on in his "mind" is just thoughts. Just thoughts. Just thoughts..... (repeat to fade...)

Perfect! :D So, what is the difference between the experience of being everything and the experience of being nothing? In *my* experience, nothing.... they are the same.

Conceptual bullshit. You are neither. This is just words. Empty words about nothing.

What I am looking for here, is a 24/7 embodied experience of the "there is no one on the receiving end." But even as I type that sentence I am seeing that this embodied knowing will never stick around 24/7 forever. It will be known, and then we go back to being just as human as we always have been

Wait a sec, but, there is actually no one on the receiving end! Ever. Any time you think or feel like there is, just stop and check those thoughts and feelings. It doesn't come and go, the thoughts do. You are actually not here right now, you don't exist, you just think you do. Or to put that in your favourite advaita-speak, "there is thinking happening, thoughts of I and me, the whole mental & physical biological process going on that has created the assumed and unquestioned character".

You are already 24/7 nothing right now. Thoughts just appear that tell you you aren't.
Thoughts contain the sense of self. Is this true? Look into that, and I'm not talking about small-self here.

Love and respect and honesty and peace and friendship,

WB.

[Walbart]

then we go back to being just as human as we always have been

Do you expect to become more than human?

[CarsonZi]

Hi Walbart :)

It almost seems like you didn't read my last post. :)

I hope that we can perhaps bypass all the mental back and forthing, all the unnecessary words and concepts, and really cut to the chase here since you aren't interested in simply having some fun conversation. ;P

I'm more than willing to keep going with this, but you have to accept that this isn't about having a fun conversation and shooting the breeze about spiritual stuff.

What *is* it about Walbart? As I've mentioned several times in our conversation, I am here out of mere curiosity. Curiosity about what changes this process could catalyze. I have no expectations of where this is going/could go. I don't know anything about "no-self" and the whole thing kinda smells a bit like trading one identification for another. Trading "I am identified with blah blah blah whatever concept" to "I am identified with the no-self concept." What I am interested in is freedom from ALL concepts, not trading one for another.

If you've "experienced" or seen that there's no self, look at the truth of this and don't let the thoughts/beliefs come back. Name and shame any identification.

It's really that simple eh? ;) Just don't let the thoughts/beliefs come back? Name and *shame* any identification?Hahaha.... Can you imagine a therapist saying that to their client?

Client: "Every time I see a man I become afraid because I was molested by one as a child"
Therapist: "Just don't let the thoughts of being molested come back. And every time they do, name and shame them."

:O !!!!!

There is a process involved here that I think you are perhaps forgetting about, or at least not giving it's proper dues. The mind is a habit machine. Simply telling the mind to stop it's life-long habitual tendencies is not a very effective approach to long term transformation in my humble opinion. In my experience, our mental habits need to be worked through, and that is a process. A process that takes consistent, dedicated effort in combination with some effective tools. Otherwise we are just trading one habit for another.

I'll say it again: Carson's body is a piece of meat, a machine, and anything that goes on in his "mind" is just thoughts. Just thoughts. Just thoughts..... (repeat to fade...)

I've never argued with that and I'm not about to start now. ;)

What I am looking for here, is a 24/7 embodied experience of the "there is no one on the receiving end." But even as I type that sentence I am seeing that this embodied knowing will never stick around 24/7 forever. It will be known, and then we go back to being just as human as we always have been

Wait a sec, but, there is actually no one on the receiving end! Ever.

With all due respect, I'm not sure if you are reading what I am writing here Walbart. :) I'm not saying that there *is* someone on the receiving end. I've said, several times (including in the paragraph you just quoted here), that there is no-one on the receiving end and what I am looking for is a non-conceptual (aka "an embodied knowing") of this Truth in each and every moment (aka dropping once and for all, any mental identifications). But as I said in my quoted paragraph above, I'm not convinced that this is EVER possible. It seems that there will always be (ever subtler and subtler) identifications that continue to need to be looked at (aka, we will always be just as human as we've always been). Any *experience* of "no-self" will never "stick" simply because it is an experience. Experiences don't last.

You are already 24/7 nothing right now. Thoughts just appear that tell you you aren't.
Thoughts contain the sense of self. Is this true? Look into that, and I'm not talking about small-self here.

Of course that is true. And I've never said anything otherwise. :)

Do you expect to become more than human?

Nope. No expectation of becoming a unicorn here! ;P

Love!
Carson :)

[Walbart]

What *is* it about Walbart?

You answer this yourself:

freedom from ALL concepts, not trading one for another.

It's not about trading or switching beliefs and identification, it's about not having any. It's about looking and seeing that you don't exist at all. All identification is false.

It's really that simple eh? ;) Just don't let the thoughts/beliefs come back? Name and *shame* any identification?

Yes, keep looking until you see it. There is nothing anywhere that you can say is "you".

The mind is a habit machine. Simply telling the mind to stop it's life-long habitual tendencies is not a very effective approach to long term transformation in my humble opinion

What you say is true enough, but this isn't about changing habits or stopping thoughts. It's about not believing every thought that arises. Mental habits can be worked through later, but it's more likely that they will fall away when the core belief in a self is annihilated. And I don't mean the self is annihilated (there isn't one), but the belief is annihilated. Habits will continue, thoughts will continue, trauma will continue, beliefs will continue, but you see them for what they are, the momentum of characteristics, conditioning, stories. Suffering is caused by believing what you think. Suffering is caused by believing the contents of thoughts.

Any *experience* of "no-self" will never "stick" simply because it is an experience. Experiences don't last.

Seeing there is no self isn't an experience.

Seeing there is no self isn't an experience.

This has nothing to do with states, bliss, universal consciousness or anything like that. It's about looking at life and seeing that there isn't a you at the centre that it is happening to. It's not an experience. And it's not about seeing that you are life and everything. Underneath the body and the mind lies nothing. There's nothing there. No identity of any kind. Can you look in your own direct experience and confirm this?

It seems that there will always be (ever subtler and subtler) identifications that continue to need to be looked at

If you remove ALL identification you won't need to worry about this.

Take it easy.