In here Sam...

[vinceschubert]

so where is the need for a 'you' ?

[loftygoal]

There isnt

[vinceschubert]

so is there a you anywhere ?
has there ever been a you ?

Tell me how the you that you thought existed came into being ?

[loftygoal]

so is there a you anywhere ?

No

has there ever been a you ?

Everything has been happening without any me. So No. There never was a me.

Tell me how the you that you thought existed came into being ?

Probably society, seeing others referring themselves as separate. Also being in a separate body from others being able to see only what is seen through this body's eyes. Is there a separate body from others? So cant we give this body-mind combination a name which is separate from other body-minds? Why cant that name be "I"?

[loftygoal]

Actually I read one of the Indian sages say this.

I experience the entire world inside myself. I hear someone inside me, I see someone inside me. Even when someone touches me, I ONLY know the sensation of touch on my skin. I do not know if there is a somebody outside of me.

So the other people with separate body-minds, is that an illusion as well? Infact whether they exist or not I really dont know. I only know my perceptions

[vinceschubert]

Wow! Sam, am i talking to the same person ?

Why cant that name be "I"?

No problems with using that name.
Problem comes when Identification leads to believing that it IS you.

I only know my perceptions

Sam, if you're not just feeding me second hand knowledge, then you are through the 'gate'
Second hand knowledge becomes First hand experiencing as it Resonates with you, when it 'feels' True.
Answer this from your experience;
What is the relationship between Experiencer, Experienced ?

[loftygoal]

oh I am just quoting that sage. It is not my experience though it feels logical.

As for me, I really cannot find me anywhere. The conditioning, body mind combination runs things whether I call it a me or not. I do still sense the separate self though as a thought/feeling.

As for the relationship between experiencer and experienced, I do see others separate from me.

[vinceschubert]

The conditioning, body mind combination runs things whether I call it a me or not.

This is true.
Do you Know this is so ?

I do still sense the separate self though as a thought/feeling.

Of course, it's been a habit you have had for a long time (most of your life)
The question is, "do you believe in it anymore?"

the relationship between experiencer and experienced

Ok, a badly phrased question. Let me try again;
When you see a thing, where is the seeing experienced ?
At what physical point in space is the object experienced not 'in' the Experiencer ?
At what physical point in space can they be considered separate ?

[loftygoal]

This is true.
Do you Know this is so ?

When I specifically think about it, it feels correct. It is definitely a belief at this point and not an experience. But still I feel understanding this has a significant affect for me. When I notice a lot of things are happening by themselves without needing "me"

Of course, it's been a habit you have had for a long time (most of your life)
The question is, "do you believe in it anymore?"

I dont believe it. But again as I said above I think I am still in transit and it has not yet become a living experience

Ok, a badly phrased question. Let me try again;
When you see a thing, where is the seeing experienced ?
At what physical point in space is the object experienced not 'in' the Experiencer ?
At what physical point in space can they be considered separate ?

At this point my body is what feels as the experiencer and anything outside the physical body space is experienced as outside or felt separate. The boundary has not yet melted off.

[vinceschubert]

Think about the situation where you glimpse a snake and react to it with adrenaline only to discover that it is actually a coil of rope.
Where did the experience of it take place?
Was there a separate experiencer ?

[loftygoal]

Think about the situation where you glimpse a snake and react to it with adrenaline only to discover that it is actually a coil of rope.
Where did the experience of it take place?
Was there a separate experiencer ?

The imaginary snake is just in my mind. A mis-perception of reality. The reaction and adrenaline are experienced in the body

There is no separate experiencer as there is no me

But what about the rope? Ofcourse I only experience it inside myself. I cannot experience it out there. But Isn't it out there? Is it not real?

[vinceschubert]

If there is no separate Experiencer and the Experienced is experienced in the mind/body (brain) organism then whether it is a snake or a coil of rope (the 'reality' of it) is irrelevant.
It may or may not be X. Who cares ? (unless you want to build a story around it)
Everything outside of your direct experience is a story.
Know this ?

[loftygoal]

That is not a reality to me yet. Intellectually makes sense.

But if it is true that everything outside of direct experience is a story. Then whatever I perceive seems to be unreal. As it doesnt exist when I dont think about it. This includes external world, my body, my thoughts, my feelings/emotions.

[vinceschubert]

Yes, this is experientially correct.
It is only thoughts (the mind) that obsesses over giving meaning and purpose and in this case explaining.
Can you find that chink in between thoughts where you Look through and see that Everything in your Direct Experience is ALL that IS ?
It's a done deal. Any thoughts are Extra, are an Addition to IS, and not necessary.

[loftygoal]

I havent yet hit that space between thoughts.