Still believing I'm outside

[moondog]

Hi Soulbug,

Thoughts seem to come from mind, from something larger than me.

They just seem to pop up into awareness out of nowhere don't they.

But do you see anything in direct experience that you recognise as or know to be 'mind' if so, please describe it. Or do thoughts just appear at the point you become aware if them?

It seems like I can stop it in the middle, and replace it with another. Correction- no. When I think “apple”, it’s the whole apple-there’s no stopping “apple” in the middle.

Exactly. You got it.

Is 'I' a different thought from the thought of say, a table?

It’s only different in my judgement. But experientially, it all feels like it’s pooled together in this big swirl of internal referencing.

Just to be sure what you mean here: are you saying that, aside from how you see the respective 'subject matter' of the two thoughts, there's no fundamental difference? If not, please explain further.

This brings me to a question. If the body is real, the table and the tree it’s made of are real, but “me” isn’t real? Is this because the table is concrete, but “me” is just a possessive notion? Then what of thoughts being real vs. the “me” concept? Isn’t me just another thought? Just want to dismantle this thing asap.

I'm not too sure what you're asking here. It's always best to be on the look-out for intellectual red herrings coming along and trying to distract you during this process. Trying to work the whole thing out by thinking will never result in you seeing the truth of no self. If it could, so many more people would have done it by now. After all, it's believing what thoughts say that gives rise to the myth of a separate self in the first place.

Our working ground in this process of looking for a self-entity is always direct experience, i.e. 'your' raw, unfiltered experience through sense arisings: seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, and feeling (both tactile and kinaesthetic) and thoughts arising. However, although this includes the awareness of thoughts arising and subsiding, it never includes the contents of thought, where I-thoughts often predominate to maintain the myth of a self running the show 24/7. When I said in a recent post - thoughts are really just data packages, opinions, judgements etc. and, as such, just conceptual, and therefore neither real nor reliable. - I meant the contents of thoughts. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

So, now let's move on to doing and controlling, to see if, in direct experience, a self can be found there:

It's clear that when we breathe, blink, digest food etc. there's no 'I' involved, but how is it for you when walking?

How is it when doing various everyday things like say, brushing your teeth, washing up, that kind of thing?
Try all kinds of stuff.

Is there any 'I' there for any of these actions, or are they just like 'automatic'?

Pete x

[Soulbug]

Hi there Pete,

But do you see anything in direct experience that you recognise as or know to be 'mind' if so, please describe it. Or do thoughts just appear at the point you become aware if them?

In direct experience, mind is an idea. It does not exist in a certain locale, nor does it have any structure or tangible quality, like thought itself.
It does seem the mind and thoughts are nowhere/everywhere.

Is 'I' a different thought from the thought of say, a table?

It’s only different in my judgement. But experientially, it all feels like it’s pooled together in this big swirl of internal referencing.

Just to be sure what you mean here: are you saying that, aside from how you see the respective 'subject matter' of the two thoughts, there's no fundamental difference? If not, please explain further.

The table and my physical presence are separate conceptually speaking, but when I drop into a more experiential space, ie.while meditating or even just quieting the mind, there does not seem to be a difference. More ideas.

I'm not too sure what you're asking here. It's always best to be on the look-out for intellectual red herrings coming along and trying to distract you during this process. Trying to work the whole thing out by thinking will never result in you seeing the truth of no self.

When I posed this question, it felt like I needed the answer. Later in the day, no answer was needed. I really appreciate the steadiness and “narrowness” of this line of inquiry. Indeed, too many red herrings to catch. Clarifying that it’s the “contents” of thought which are unreliable is helpful however.

It's clear that when we breathe, blink, digest food etc. there's no 'I' involved, but how is it for you when walking?

Walking is so second nature. Reminds me of zoning out when you’re driving sometimes and when you arrive at your destination, you can’t remember the details of your driving experience. You just do it. No thought required, no planning, no wondering or worrying. Just walking. Just driving.

How is it when doing various everyday things like say, brushing your teeth, washing up, that kind of thing?
Try all kinds of stuff.

After the initial surmounting of inertia and once involved in the task of teeth-brushing, making the bed, drying off after a bath, putting clothes on, sweeping up, it feels like I’m in a flow. Even cooking meals and yoga practice can feel so organic and unforced, as do some creative endeavors such as drawing, writing and even teaching, especially when I am in the movement and not preoccupied with fixing life.
When I get back into concepts, (shoulds, ideas, beliefs, stories etc.) the freshness dissipates.

Is there any 'I' there for any of these actions, or are they just like 'automatic'?

The “I” vanishes when the agenda is dropped. Joy arises for no reason.

Thanks Pete!

[moondog]

Hi Soulbug,

In direct experience, mind is an idea. It does not exist in a certain locale, nor does it have any structure or tangible quality, like thought itself.It does seem the mind and thoughts are nowhere/everywhere.

That's the way I see it too.

The table and my physical presence are separate conceptually speaking, but when I drop into a more experiential space, ie.while meditating or even just quieting the mind, there does not seem to be a difference. More ideas.

The question is nothing to do with your physical presence, or that of a table. It simply asks whether you can see any fundamental difference between 'I' as a thought (which you have seen is all that 'I' is) and the thought of a table. Can you see any such difference? If so, please outline what that difference is?

When I posed this question, it felt like I needed the answer. Later in the day, no answer was needed. I really appreciate the steadiness and “narrowness” of this line of inquiry. Indeed, too many red herrings to catch. Clarifying that it’s the “contents” of thought which are unreliable is helpful however.

I'm glad what I said clarified/simplified things. Really, as a guide, it's just my job to point out to you where to look, i.e. In direct experience which includes pointing you back there when you're seduced by thoughts to look away.

Walking is so second nature. Reminds me of zoning out when you’re driving sometimes and when you arrive at your destination, you can’t remember the details of your driving experience. You just do it. No thought required, no planning, no wondering or worrying. Just walking. Just driving.

That's exactly it Soulbug. I've never liked the word 'automatic' to describe this aspect of the way we function, as it sounds a bit robotic and cold, and being such effortlessness just isn't anything like that, but I haven't been able to come up with a better word so far. And, after all, it is just illustrative.

After the initial surmounting of inertia and once involved in the task of teeth-brushing, making the bed, drying off after a bath, putting clothes on, sweeping up, it feels like I’m in a flow. Even cooking meals and yoga practice can feel so organic and unforced, as do some creative endeavors such as drawing, writing and even teaching, especially when I am in the movement and not preoccupied with fixing life.
When I get back into concepts, (shoulds, ideas, beliefs, stories etc.) the freshness dissipates.

Yeah, it's just a brilliant and amazing feeling when you discover this effortlessness isn't it. But remember, even the dull conceptual stuff you mention is equally 'spontaneous' and free of any creator-entity whatsoever.

Is there any 'I' there for any of these actions, or are they just like 'automatic'?

The “I” vanishes when the agenda is dropped. Joy arises for no reason.

Ok, you're doing really well now, so let's now move on a little from doing/controlling to deciding/choosing (although the border between these always seems to be very fuzzy). Anyway, please have a go at the following exercise:

Raise your right arm (or don’t). In that process of raising the right arm (or not), a decision is made, or at least something happens (or doesn’t). But can you pinpoint the actual moment of choice and find the actual entity that appears to be making that choice? In direct experience, can that moment of choice, that apparent chooser, actually be found? Or does the idea 'I just chose to (not) raise my right arm' come after the event itself?

Also, can I ask you to have a look at the following short video clip from BBC Horizon - The Secret You on Neuroscience and Freewill: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-i3AiOS4nCE . It demonstrates scientifically that our decisions and choices are made a full 6 seconds before we think we make them, i.e. before a thought arises saying, "I decided to do this." There is no substitute for looking in direct experience, but this is excellent scientific corroboration for what is to be found, or rather not found, in direct experience.

Pete x

[Soulbug]

Hello Pete,

The question is nothing to do with your physical presence, or that of a table. It simply asks whether you can see any fundamental difference between 'I' as a thought (which you have seen is all that 'I' is) and the thought of a table. Can you see any such difference? If so, please outline what that difference is?

Ahh, I see. No, there’s no difference between the “I” thought, and the thought of the table. They both seem to inhabit this nowhere world of thoughts and mind.

But remember, even the dull conceptual stuff you mention is equally 'spontaneous' and free of any creator-entity whatsoever.

I really like your guidance on this. I can see how I divide the experience of being in the flow, (favorable, higher end functioning) and being in the conceptual mind, (unfavorable, low end functioning). In my zeal to “transcend” this “me-ness”, I openly reject and judge the conceptualizer in an effort to “get rid” of it, but that’s where more separation comes in the back door. I just cried a little as I came to know “it’s all good”, ALL of it - my ideas of right and wrong, good and bad, high and low. It’s All Life! Wow, another chain across my heart is gone. How beautiful is that? I will sit here a while with the implications of this.

Raise your right arm (or don’t). In that process of raising the right arm (or not), a decision is made, or at least something happens (or doesn’t). But can you pinpoint the actual moment of choice and find the actual entity that appears to be making that choice? In direct experience, can that moment of choice, that apparent chooser, actually be found? Or does the idea 'I just chose to (not) raise my right arm' come after the event itself?

When I raised my right arm, I swore to tell the whole truth, nothing but the truth, so help me God. (swearing in for testimony here in this country. Don’t know what you do in the UK in court). Couldn’t resist!
When I did raise my arm, I could not find a division between the “chooser” and the action, nor can I find the chooser now or then. Seems like the moment of choice was after the request at some point, and that seems more specific than finding the “one” who did it. No, it does not appear that the idea comes in after the event. Come to think of it, if you now gave me a new instruction, I’d either do it or not, and then say I chose it. There would be a delay. Hmmmm, what’s moving my body?? I like these implications too!

Also, can I ask you to have a look at the following short video clip from BBC Horizon - The Secret You on Neuroscience and Freewill: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-i3AiOS4nCE . It demonstrates scientifically that our decisions and choices are made a full 6 seconds before we think we make them, i.e. before a thought arises saying, "I decided to do this." There is no substitute for looking in direct experience, but this is excellent scientific corroboration for what is to be found, or rather not found, in direct experience.

I watched the video. Very cool. Several questions sprang to mind about free will, destiny and choice, but for today, I am surrendering such questions and doubts. I am going to give the space for the truth to arise by facing the truth, instead of turning my back on it with question. Even though concepts are still part of this beautiful whole, my belief they are real convinces me I am separate, and therefore have to work to fix, rectify, comprehend and change to “arrive”.
Just for today, I put them all aside and let go.

Infinite thanks to you my guide.

[moondog]

Hi Soulbug,

Ahh, I see. No, there’s no difference between the “I” thought, and the thought of the table. They both seem to inhabit this nowhere world of thoughts and mind.

Great, I'm glad that this is now seen clearly.

I really like your guidance on this. I can see how I divide the experience of being in the flow, (favorable, higher end functioning) and being in the conceptual mind, (unfavorable, low end functioning). In my zeal to “transcend” this “me-ness”, I openly reject and judge the conceptualizer in an effort to “get rid” of it, but that’s where more separation comes in the back door. I just cried a little as I came to know “it’s all good”, ALL of it - my ideas of right and wrong, good and bad, high and low. It’s All Life! Wow, another chain across my heart is gone. How beautiful is that? I will sit here a while with the implications of this.

I like your comment - In my zeal to “transcend” this “me-ness”, I openly reject and judge the conceptualizer in an effort to “get rid” of it, but that’s where more separation comes in the back door. It's the seductive power of thoughts, containing judgements and preferences again, isn't it. I just cried a little as I came to know “it’s all good”, ALL of it - my ideas of right and wrong, good and bad, high and low. It’s All Life! Wow, another chain across my heart is gone. It's just lovely for me to read you saying that.

When I raised my right arm, I swore to tell the whole truth, nothing but the truth, so help me God. (swearing in for testimony here in this country. Don’t know what you do in the UK in court). Couldn’t resist!

Yeah, we have something pretty similar I think. Now, whenever I'm looking at this exercise, I'll think of that.

When I did raise my arm, I could not find a division between the “chooser” and the action, nor can I find the chooser now or then. Seems like the moment of choice was after the request at some point, and that seems more specific than finding the “one” who did it. No, it does not appear that the idea comes in after the event. Come to think of it, if you now gave me a new instruction, I’d either do it or not, and then say I chose it. There would be a delay. Hmmmm, what’s moving my body?? I like these implications too!

Noticing and really seeing that there's just no one doing any choosing or deciding can really cut through whatever vestiges of the self illusion that remain. You have clearly seen that.

I watched the video. Very cool. Several questions sprang to mind about free will, destiny and choice, but for today, I am surrendering such questions and doubts. I am going to give the space for the truth to arise by facing the truth, instead of turning my back on it with question. Even though concepts are still part of this beautiful whole, my belief they are real convinces me I am separate, and therefore have to work to fix, rectify, comprehend and change to “arrive”.

Nicely put. If 'you' let them, the questions and doubts (i.e. more thoughts, I-thoughts) will just keep trying to undermine what you are seeing. But, so long as you see them for what they are - just thoughts, impersonal arisings - there can, literally, be no problem.

Letting go is good.

So now, I reckon is a good time to take a look at just one other fundamental area where a self might be found: the body.

As always, in direct experience:

Does the body experience sensations and thoughts?

Is the "body" just another thought label for sensations (namely tactile & kinaesthetic)?

Pete x

[Soulbug]

Hi Pete,

If 'you' let them, the questions and doubts (i.e. more thoughts, I-thoughts) will just keep trying to undermine what you are seeing. But, so long as you see them for what they are - just thoughts, impersonal arisings - there can, literally, be no problem.

So grateful for beautiful insights I received yesterday.
Today, I have had a lot of doubt come up, specific to “arriving” and I fluctuate between understanding that there’s nothing to “get” and convinced there’s something else I need to “do”. Intellectually, conceptually I understand that it’s all right here. I really trust that, but I don’t feel it viscerally, organically yet.
I know, it’s all more thought just arising, but today it’s sticking and the fear is that I will remain in the suffering of unawakened existence, in this sort of limbo-land. I feel so frustratingly close and realize how very important it is to me.
So much so, I felt exhausted and had to take a nap. I had experience in the sort of half dream state of a scene presented to me as if it was asking me to just be in/with it exactly as it was. As I looked, I saw it all so crystal clear, so simple, so pure and then something cancelled it out. My dream tried this 2 more times with different scenes, with the same results. Again, it feels like it’s my brain short-circuiting like it’s too much info! Don’t go there! And then I never get behind the veil.

Does the body experience sensations and thoughts?

Yes, it seems like the body experiences pain/pleasure, temperature and sensory information. It doesn’t experience thought (although it experiences results of thoughts), yet I feel strong energetic signals in the body in relationship to environment and other beings. I probably feel it first, then label it however.

Is the "body" just another thought label for sensations (namely tactile & kinaesthetic)?

I see. Yeah, like the idea “body” is a localized bundle allowing us to have this life-thing. It’s not mine nor is it truly localized, just another form to broadcast life.

Thank you so dearly.

[moondog]

Hi Soulbug,

Today, I have had a lot of doubt come up, specific to “arriving” and I fluctuate between understanding that there’s nothing to “get” and convinced there’s something else I need to “do”. Intellectually, conceptually I understand that it’s all right here. I really trust that, but I don’t feel it viscerally, organically yet.
I know, it’s all more thought just arising, but today it’s sticking and the fear is that I will remain in the suffering of unawakened existence, in this sort of limbo-land. I feel so frustratingly close and realize how very important it is to me.

Don't worry, this happens to a lot of people as they see through the illusion of self. The mind seems to mount a last desperate rearguard action, using thoughts of doubt that anything has really been seen, and also that it doesn't feel dramatic enough. Just look at these doubt-thoughts, expectation/disappointment-thoughts, or other attempted distractions, and see them for what they are, just impersonal arisings, telling 'you' that there is a you. But, when you go back and just keep looking in all of the areas of direct experience that there are, and see absolutely no self there doing, deciding or controlling anything, you'll know for a fact that there's no 'you' and that what those thoughts are telling you is total crap. So do that Soulbug, just look, look, look so that your realisation deepens. The more sure you are, the deeper your realisation will be. Ignore the thoughts and focus on the feeling of not finding.

Let me know what happens when you do this.

To recap, if it's unambiguously clear to you that there's no self-entity anywhere to be found in direct experience, and it's equally clear to you that the contents of your thoughts that refer to a you are unreal and therefore neither reliable nor believable, then you you have seen through the illusion of self, job done.

Yes, it seems like the body experiences pain/pleasure, temperature and sensory information. It doesn’t experience thought (although it experiences results of thoughts), yet I feel strong energetic signals in the body in relationship to environment and other beings. I probably feel it first, then label it however.

Is the "body" just another thought label for sensations (namely tactile & kinaesthetic)?

I see. Yeah, like the idea “body” is a localized bundle allowing us to have this life-thing. It’s not mine nor is it truly localized, just another form to broadcast life.

So, your second answer seems to supersede your first. Am I right in understanding that you're saying that,when you look in direct experience, all you can experience are sensations. 'Body' is just a conventional label for these. If I'm wrong tell me what you mean.

Also, what are the results of thought that you say 'the body' experiences?

Pete x

[Soulbug]

Thanks for your reassurance Pete. I want to give a thoughtful reply to all this, and I will repost in the morning here.
Bless and thanks.

[moondog]

Hi Soulbug,

Yes, it's a good idea to take your time. Look forward to hearing from you later today.

Pete x

[Soulbug]

Hi Pete,

So do that Soulbug, just look, look, look so that your realisation deepens. The more sure you are, the deeper your realisation will be. Ignore the thoughts and focus on the feeling of not finding.

Let me know what happens when you do this.

Thanks again for the reassurance. I felt afraid in unknown territory. Still do somewhat, but it’s OK. I am happy to do this.
When I look at my feelings about “not finding”, what is evident is my desire to control it because I am looking for safety in “awakening”. Self-entity seems real. But as I penetrate to find this one who is afraid, I can’t hold her. At most, I can hold the feelings that arise, even that disappears as I look on it lovingly. It seems I have to do this repeatedly however.

So, your second answer seems to supersede your first. Am I right in understanding that you're saying that,when you look in direct experience, all you can experience are sensations. 'Body' is just a conventional label for these. If I'm wrong tell me what you mean.

Your second question revealed something to me that I was unaware of in answering the first question. This body does not experience thought, only sensations. In other words, it doesn’t think- it’s not the source of thought. Asking me if the body is just another thought label for the sensations opened my mind to the possibility that this body does not belong to me. It’s a body experiencing the life of sensation, movement and sight.

Also, what are the results of thought that you say 'the body' experiences?

It seems to me that I experience visceral “reactions” to environments or certain people. This could be from my subconscious mind, or from some kind of signal from the “outside”. I guess I would call this results of my own and others’ thoughts or ideas. Psychic experiences, healings, dreams and the like. Also, certain thoughts have “created” some body symptoms. I see the body’s neutrality in all this, but it seems to me it’s a “receptor” of some kind, and does indeed respond to thought, as well as the sensory spontaneity of life itself. As the body does not think for itself, it is in itself, a natural organism, and appears to be “in tune” with its environment (namely thought). Isn’t this whole place one big idea?
This body is a localized bundle of energy –and is being “done” by life itself. I-this concept mind-don’t even have to think about it life-ing. (bless it) But it seems like it responds uniquely to my thoughts about it and around it.
Might I hazard a guess that when I live in direct experience, and dropping thought as my “go-to” safety zone, that the body will just be able to “life” without the burden of thought?
I still have difficulty believing that it is not somehow attached to this “me”. If I am Beingness-that Beingness has taken temporary housing in this particular body to play and do life. It still feels personal. It’s where I am communicating from. Guess “me” is still hiding out in this body.

Thanks so much Pete.

[moondog]

Hi Soulbug,

When I look at my feelings about “not finding”, what is evident is my desire to control it because I am looking for safety in “awakening”. Self-entity seems real. But as I penetrate to find this one who is afraid, I can’t hold her. At most, I can hold the feelings that arise, even that disappears as I look on it lovingly. It seems I have to do this repeatedly however.

Ok, but can you find, in direct experience, any self, any entity, any 'you' that penetrates to find this one that is afraid? Or that can't hold her? Or that holds the feelings that arise? Or that can be there to disappear when you look on it lovingly? Or that looks on it lovingly? Or that seems to have to do it repeatedly?

Can any of these be found in direct experience?

Your second question revealed something to me that I was unaware of in answering the first question. This body does not experience thought, only sensations. In other words, it doesn’t think- it’s not the source of thought. Asking me if the body is just another thought label for the sensations opened my mind to the possibility that this body does not belong to me. It’s a body experiencing the life of sensation, movement and sight.

So, just so there's no trace of any doubt, do you see 'the body' as anything other than a thought label?

This body is a localized bundle of energy –and is being “done” by life itself. I-this concept mind-don’t even have to think about it life-ing. (bless it) But it seems like it responds uniquely to my thoughts about it and around it.

Maybe this answers my question above. But what do you mean by I-this concept mind-don’t even have to think about it life-ing. What is that? And what do you see in direct experience that shows that I-this concept mind-don’t even have to think about it life-ing?

Sorry if all this seems a bit picky Soulbug, but I just no need you to clarify all of these things so that you, and I, can see whether you've actually seen that there's just ain't no self, nowhere.

Pete x

[Soulbug]

Hi Pete,

Sorry if all this seems a bit picky Soulbug

I appreciate your persistence, because I don’t know where to look without it! So I am happy you are picky.

Ok, but can you find, in direct experience, any self, any entity, any 'you' that penetrates to find this one that is afraid? Or that can't hold her? Or that holds the feelings that arise? Or that can be there to disappear when you look on it lovingly? Or that looks on it lovingly? Or that seems to have to do it repeatedly?

This is interesting, because, until now, looking for the one who was “looking for” something within had completely escaped me. I was looking only for the unreality of the “one” who is afraid, not the “one” who is wanting to penetrate within and find, love and hold. That adds a whole new layer to “looking”.
The answer is I cannot find that one who wants to manage my feelings in direct experience.

Maybe this answers my question above. But what do you mean by I-this concept mind-don’t even have to think about it life-ing. What is that? And what do you see in direct experience that shows that I-this concept mind-don’t even have to think about it life-ing?

And here it is the same “I” mentioned above, which doesn’t have to think about the body doing its life. It seems like the internal manager, internal noticer and internal critic. Likewise, in direct experience, I cannot find this conceptualizer, inside or out.
BUT- I still feel that the body, this one here, is somewhat personal. It’s where I communicate from, as opposed to that body over there. I cannot say yet that there’s no self in here, because it appears to respond to my dictates, while that body over there does not.
AND-no, I cannot find the dictator.

As I reply here, I am never sure if I am thorough enough in answering. Also, there’s no immediacy in answers and I get to feeling muddled and frustrated. Like it’s all a jumble, and I cannot make head nor tails of it. I am determined to stay with this, but I get this feeling that I am missing something. I don't read any other threads here because I want to stay one-pointed and pure in my work with you, and don't want influence/comparison to others experience.
What am I doing wrong? Clearly, I am not looking rightly at this looker.
I really want to see!!!!
THANKYOU!

[moondog]

Hi Soulbug,

I appreciate your persistence, because I don’t know where to look without it! So I am happy you are picky.

No problem at all. I'm totally committed to helping you realise fully the truth of no self by pointing out to you where to look.

This is interesting, because, until now, looking for the one who was “looking for” something within had completely escaped me. I was looking only for the unreality of the “one” who is afraid, not the “one” who is wanting to penetrate within and find, love and hold. That adds a whole new layer to “looking”.
The answer is I cannot find that one who wants to manage my feelings in direct experience.

Ah-ha, tricky bugger the mind (just thoughts)! Not only is there no self-entity, there is also no entity looking (or doing anything), because there's no entity. Once you see that, as you've now done, it seems obvious. If there's no self to be found, how could there be a self looking? But this can stay 'hidden' until 'you' find it.

And here it is the same “I” mentioned above, which doesn’t have to think about the body doing its life. It seems like the internal manager, internal noticer and internal critic. Likewise, in direct experience, I cannot find this conceptualizer, inside or out.

Great, that's because it isn't there.

BUT- I still feel that the body, this one here, is somewhat personal. It’s where I communicate from, as opposed to that body over there. I cannot say yet that there’s no self in here, because it appears to respond to my dictates, while that body over there does not.

Remembering what you've seen and now know of thoughts and their power to seduce you (or me, or anyone) into believing what isn't true, can you say to me that this feeling that the body is personal, and is where you communicate from, is what you've seen in direct experience? Or is just another thought? If so, why believe it?

Given all that you have seen so far during this thread, what do you mean by my dictates?

I can't do this for you, I can only show you where to look. You have to do the looking. You have to do it for yourself.

Look to see what's really happening, and what's just concocted by thoughts.

As I reply here, I am never sure if I am thorough enough in answering. Also, there’s no immediacy in answers and I get to feeling muddled and frustrated. Like it’s all a jumble, and I cannot make head nor tails of it. I am determined to stay with this, but I get this feeling that I am missing something. I don't read any other threads here because I want to stay one-pointed and pure in my work with you, and don't want influence/comparison to others experience. What am I doing wrong? Clearly, I am not looking rightly at this looker.

As I said before, when looking gets deeper and the truth of no self starts to become clearer, the mind, the ego or whatever you want to call it, steps up and doubt-thoughts can spew forth in profusion. So do thoughts about expectations not being met, disappointment, unworthiness, failure etc. All bullshit. All just thoughts trying to protect a non-existent entity. Rest assured Soulbug, your answers are fine and there's nothing wrong with how you are doing this. But you are clearly overthinking. Forget about all your expectations. And also just relax, let go and look at 'your' direct experience. As you live your life, as you go about your day, just keep actually looking everywhere in your experience to see if you can find a you. Every time you see that there's no you to be found, your realisation of no self deepens. It's as simple as that.

Seeing clearly that there is no self and accepting that, in the same way that you accept that Santa doesn't exist, is completely independent of, and unconnected to, whether or not you still experience anxiety, anger, doubt etc. Such feelings and thoughts are only relevant in this context if you give them credence as real and true, believing that they are created by/part of 'you', and so allowing them to function as a distraction from actually seeing.

Pete x

[Soulbug]

Dear Companion,

I can't do this for you, I can only show you where to look. You have to do the looking. You have to do it for yourself.

I truly appreciate the specificity of your guidance, and showing me exactly where to look.

can you say to me that this feeling that the body is personal, and is where you communicate from, is what you've seen in direct experience? Or is just another thought? If so, why believe it?

It still feels like there’s an experiencer in here.

Given all that you have seen so far during this thread, what do you mean by my dictates?

Really struggling with this one and stuck on this point. Honestly, right now, I can still see my point here. I cannot even find the direct experience related to it.
Call it blind, asleep or hypnotized?!

Every time you see that there's no you to be found, your realisation of no self deepens. It's as simple as that.

Let me say here, that I trust that what you tell me is true.I KNOW this is absolute. It appears the me I think I am is in a blind spot. But I am looking where you point, and have confidence in the process. I am so on it!
Like a puzzle I already know the answer to, but fell asleep and thought I forgot.
Will post tomorrow on this point.

Thank you Pete.

[moondog]

Hi Soulbug,

I truly appreciate the specificity of your guidance, and showing me exactly where to look.

Absolutely no problem. I really enjoy helping you to see what's true and I'll just keep on showing you where to look for as long as you want.

can you say to me that this feeling that the body is personal, and is where you communicate from, is what you've seen in direct experience? Or is just another thought? If so,why believe it?

It still feels like there’s an experiencer in here.

But that doesn't answer my question. Can you see, hear, smell, taste or touch this 'experiencer' in direct experience? If so, please describe it and tell me what it does and how it does it. If not, isn't it just another thought? If not that, what is it?

Really struggling with this one and stuck on this point. Honestly, right now, I can still see my point here. I cannot even find the direct experience related to it.

But I can't see your point, hence my question. I have difficulty understanding why, if you've not been able to find a self at all, including as controller, chooser or decider, how can you seriously refer to my dictates?

Who is doing the dictating? And how can there be a 'my' if there's no you?

Let me say here, that I trust that what you tell me is true.I KNOW this is absolute. It appears the me I think I am is in a blind spot. But I am looking where you point, and have confidence in the process. I am so on it!
Like a puzzle I already know the answer to, but fell asleep and thought I forgot.

Can you just say a bit about this 'blind spot' Soulbug. If you know there's no separate self anywhere, then surely you know there isn't one anywhere to be found. Like Santa or Batman, 'you' know there is no self.

So where is the room for a blind spot?

I think it might help narrow this all down if I ask you exactly where you are able to see that there's no self. Then we can pinpoint any area where this is unclear and focus in on that.

In direct experience:

Have you been able to find, a ‘self’ that is the ‘experiencer’?

Or a self that is the doer, or can control what happens?

Or a self that ‘makes’ decisions?

Or a self who ‘does the thinking’?

Is the "body" just another thought label for sensations (namely tactile & kinesthetic)?

Are the five body senses made to arise or experienced by this ‘self’?

Is there a self ‘in here’ which is separate from the world and others ‘out there’

Is there doubt or unclarity that in all these cases the ‘self’ is nothing other than a mental fabrication?

It's a bit of a long list of questions but the answers can be brief unless, as I said, there is something you'd like to examine some more.

Pete x