Be grateful for help making this last jump

[Murray]

The image of the body is loose but it comes about from markers. I can sense my heart beating, this sensation feels below my head where thoughts are sensed and above where there is contact with the ground and chair. The idea of the body arises for me if I thinking about moving, for example today my lower back feels a little tight. There is a connection that if I stood up the sensation of the solid chair would cease but the tightness in the back would still be there - therefore the 'I' feels more ownership over the back sensation than the chair sensation
Pointless thoughts in the sense that there is recognition that all thoughts are secondary - arising as a result of the direct experience from the sensation. The sensation is primary and therefore the thoughts seem unnecessary. They feel like a distraction. However, I recognise my danger zone of intellectualising insight and trying to shoosh thoughts which is unhelpful.

[Murray]

The image of the body is loose but it comes about from markers. I can sense my heart beating, this sensation feels below my head where thoughts are sensed and above where there is contact with the ground and chair. The idea of the body arises for me if I thinking about moving, for example today my lower back feels a little tight. There is a connection that if I stood up the sensation of the solid chair would cease but the tightness in the back would still be there - therefore the 'I' feels more ownership over the back sensation than the chair sensation
Pointless thoughts in the sense that there is recognition that all thoughts are secondary - arising as a result of the direct experience from the sensation. The sensation is primary and therefore the thoughts seem unnecessary. They feel like a distraction. However, I recognise my danger zone of intellectualising insight and trying to shoosh thoughts which is unhelpful.

[stu]

Hi Murray

So the sense of it being *your* body comes from thoughts and sensations.
First let’s consider thoughts:

…my head where thoughts are sensed .

ok. There is awareness of thoughts. But is the notion that they are sensed in your head just another thought? Would they feel any different if they were sensed in your heart, for example? Or how about if they were sensed in your gut (e.g. having a gut reaction)? Does that ever happen? Does awareness of thought have a fixed single location at all? Please note that I am not asking you to use direct looking here (though if you want to that’s up to you). I’d just like to know what your response is to my questions.

Now, let’s look at a sensations, such as:

I can sense my heart beating… there is contact with the ground and chair... lower back feels a little tight.

If you use direct looking to examine just one body sensation, at the moment when you first switch your attention to it, does that sensation have a quality of ‘self’ straight away? Or does the ‘selfness’ come later by way of thoughts? You might need to try this a number of times, to be sure.

Looking forward to your reply
Cheers
Stuart

[Murray]

I am finding it hard to think of answers. Self arrises, just as thoughts arise. It is just another thought. There is no thinker. If I If I think of my hand, there is an image of my hand and a sense of it being there that it can be moved. But there is also recognition that this just is. Even the action of closing my eyes and thinking of a body part to think of occurs, there does not need to be a self in that process. These are labels to particular sensations that are associated to them arising out of this present moment to make a picture. But there is still a loose sense of me, in that I am here looking to lose my sense of self. Why?

[Murray]

Forgive me, that last post was a little bit whiny. Only there is a frustration that bubbles up sometimes. There have been long periods over a long time that I have looked at the present direct experience. From a place of silent stillness that is this non moving self arises, thoughts pass through. Having so rigorously for so long questioned every time a though has arisen in any situation at any time where is the self there is recognition that that is pointless as it only evokes a false sense of a self looking for a self. Is it not better to just recognise a thought appears and let it pass by. What really needs to be done to awaken other than let all these ideas fade away. There is no awakening. The echo of mind old lingers on - let it. No need to add to it or fight with it. That is my instinct anyway. That nothing can be forced here.

[stu]

Hi Murray

Thanks for your posts. The earlier one didn’t come across as a bit whiny at all – just as a mind engaging and grappling with the issues.

Self arrises, just as thoughts arise. It is just another thought. There is no thinker.

I couldn’t agree more. But you also state:

But there is still a loose sense of me, in that I am here looking to lose my sense of self.

which suggests that there is more work to do.

Ok. From your earlier post, it sounds like you’ve established that there is no self in your body, nor in deciding which body part to attend to. And your most recent post suggests that you’ve established that there is no self that generates thoughts. Have I got all that right?

So where does the “loose sense of me” (that you mention above) come from? Could you describe it more? For example, is it there all the time, or only in certain situations?

Cheers
Stuart

[Murray]

I would say that right yeah. There are a few things that although not always sometimes lead on to a sense of self. One if this dialog about reality, about being selfless and present, that goes on. There is an odd attachment to what I have already learned about the nature of things - even though part of what I learned is there is nothing to know. There is a sense that I am not there yet despite all this, that when I hit that point it will so clear there will no room left for doubt.
Another difficulty can be other people, an odd play of feeling separate yet also very connected. Sometime it flows very naturally and selflessly, other times I can hear my mind running in the background and thus a sense of self sometimes arises with this. It is silly, there is nothing really in death or life that scares me, but people can make me anxious.

[stu]

Hi Murray

I dunno if you know the term ‘selfing’, so I’ll explain it before using it.

Seeing no-self does not instantly get rid of years of previous conditioning (habits) from the mind. So when certain situations are encountered, the thoughts that arise can be much the same as the ones that arose before seeing no-self, and those thoughts can generate the sense of self. That is selfing…. The mind constructing the illusion of a self. But after seeing no-self, such selfing thoughts might have less energy behind them, and be a bit less compelling, and might fade more rapidly. Does this idea of selfing ‘fit’ with your experience? I suspect it might, because earlier on you said:

The echo of mind old lingers on - let it.

I wonder if this is happening to you in some social situations? The trouble with selfing, is that if it is not dealt with appropriately, it can lead to the generation of doubt (that the illusion of self was really seen through), and the mind can use it to rebuild a long term view of a self. In other words, I’m saying that your approach of just letting it happen, may not be a good thing to do.

You could try dealing with selfing by using direct looking to look for a self while it is happening, or as soon as possible afterwards. Perhaps you’d like to try this next time selfing happens? If so, do tell me what happens!

Another way to deal with doubt of no-self is to look for the doubter right now. Who is doubting? Is there a self that is ‘doing’ the doubting?

Another way to deal with doubt of no-self is to reflect on the causes of it. Is doubting a common pattern of thought? What factors brought doubt into being? If based on expectations, are those expectations reasonable? Could they even be wrong?

Looking forward to your reply
Stuart

[Murray]

Thank you. Yes that's very helpful. I think that fits very well. I have seen through the illusion. I feel a bit like this is a purgatory. The old way of seeing is gone but what fully replaces it has not yet reached out in to every corner. There is an excitement and anticipation of the marvel of just this incredible reality, sometimes there is an urge to go chasing this but this is the self wanting to feel like it can do something. That's more what I men by just letting things happen - pass through. There was or sometimes is lingering doubt about when to follow a though and when to let it past but as self is just another though there is no decider of decisions - I just have to trust myself more when seemingly faced with choice, to choose and recognise that there is no choice at the same time.
I feel a bit like my mind is trying to wade in from every angle, to try and comprehend what can not be understood so that there is absolute understanding that what can't be seen is always here. Does that make sense?
Cheers. M

[stu]

Hi Murray
That’s great! I’m glad you realize that you’ve seen through the illusion of self.

I feel a bit like my mind is trying to wade in from every angle, to try and comprehend what can not be understood so that there is absolute understanding that what can't be seen is always here. Does that make sense?

Yes. ‘Trying to make sense of’ is a habitual thought pattern, so it is bound to happen. But seeing no-self is not a thought-based understanding, more a shift in perception, so I agree that it cannot really be ‘understood’.

There are a standard list of final questions that are used on this website as a way of checking that the illusion has indeed been seen through. Some overlap with what we have already discussed, so sorry for the repetition. But it can be helpful to go through them all, partly as a way of minimizing the likelihood of doubt reoccurring. Here we go:

1) Is there a separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form? Was there ever?

2) Explain in detail what the illusion of separate self is, when it starts and how it works from your own experience. Describe it fully as you see it now.

3) How does it feel to see this? What is the difference from before you saw? Please report from when you first saw it.

4) What was the last bit that pushed you over, made you look?

5) Do you decide, intend, choose, control events in Life? Do you make anything
happen? Give examples from your experience.

6) Anything to add?

Cheers
Stuart

[Murray]

Sorry for not replying before now Stu. It just wasn't the moment.

Here goes then.

1) No. The self is always observable, not the observed. There is an I as a reference point as to distinguish between you and I but the self arises in this present moment and ceases with it also. However I should also say that there is no observer of I as really this is just the deduction of all things that can be observed. What is left is not a thing. It is just this present moment in it's entirety which may include memory and anticipation but is fully residing in the now as the now is always now and here is alway here.

2) 'Yesterday I bumped in to an old friend' Yesterday as in the past there was a me. Time passed and here I am now. Only that yesterday only exists from the perspective of today. 'a friend' a sense of distinction can be made that there is a self me and another self her. Only no there is just an event of which we were. No separation - all an expression of now.

3) It is difficult for me to say when. For the realisation is not a discovery. It is a recognition that this is it. And so when realised I always knew. For this realisation to become integrated in to all parts of being has been a process - but the biggest difference has been acceptance. A trust that in allowing things to be exactly as they are I can relax - no more effort has to be made to 'be present' as this is the present aware of itself.

4) Surrender. That even the difficulty is enjoyed, the journey is enjoyed for where is there to look than here.

5) I do nothing, never have and never will do. Making the decision never to decide choice is just a movement, an illusion. There are intentions, to be more open. But these are held as intentions and then left alone. No action is required in their pursuit. I make nothing happen as I am the happening.

6) There is a sense that this is just a new beginning. Time no longer feels the game, it is time that uses time now to dissolve. Not enlightened (yet) reality still contained by limits. But no longer striving.

Sorry I've really given much in the way of examples but nothing immediate coming to mind. Please quiz and query anything you will. Thanks.

[stu]

Hi Murray
I thought you’d gone. I’m glad you’re back.

I enjoyed reading your answers… especially where you said:

3)… no more effort has to be made to 'be present'.

I have a couple questions:

1) No. The self is always observable, not the observed.

Sorry, but I don’t understand you here. If the self is always observable, doesn’t that mean that it is always present? If so, then that seems to contradict you saying ‘No’ at the start.

5) I do nothing, never have and never will do. .

I get what you are saying. But out of curiosity, how do daily decisions happen? For example, how were the clothes that you are wearing now selected, as opposed to different clothes?

Cheers
Stuart

[Murray]

Sorry, but I don’t understand you here. If the self is always observable, doesn’t that mean that it is always present? If so, then that seems to contradict you saying ‘No’ at the start.

I think I more meant the self arises just like any other thought. Much of the time things just happen. I don't think I am going to speak here, words are spoken. Sometimes there is an I that arises of itself, often this is followed by the reaction of where is the I. A sense that "I feel confused" for example, then rather than be concerned with the supposed sense of "confusion" investigate where is this "I". The I can not be detected and I leave it at that.

I get what you are saying. But out of curiosity, how do daily decisions happen? For example, how were the clothes that you are wearing now selected, as opposed to different clothes?

There may be choice such as will I wear the red shirt or blue shirt. However as soon as the red shirt is chosen there was no choice and is no choice. Even if I then change my mind and pick the blue shirt from the now there was no choice and is no choice. Perhaps the shirt chooses me as much as I choose the shirt. Infact yes, I think it is quite fair to say that.

[stu]

Hi Murray

Thanks for your reply. Your technique for dealing with confusion sounds effective.

Even if I then change my mind and pick the blue shirt from the now there was no choice and is no choice.

Was there a choice in the past? Is there a past/now/future or is there just "no time"?

Earlier on you said:

Not enlightened (yet) reality still contained by limits.

What can get enlightened? And what can be contained in reality?

In response to question 1 (of the 6 questions) you said:

the self arises just like any other thought

which is nice and clear. But you also said

There is an I as a reference point as to distinguish between you and I

which is less clear. Could you please answer Q1 again in clear simple language? Thanks. Here it is:
1) Is there a separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form? Was there ever?

Cheers
Stuart

[Murray]

What can get enlightened? And what can be contained in reality?

Those are wonderful questions. All limits are self imposed, if there is no self there is no limits.

There isn't a full answer I give give to that first question at this moment. Nothing. No thing can get enlightened. There is nothing and ah, it is here, just. But I am coming in to recognition that that full realisation can not be forced. The is knows better than me when I am ready to fully not be. I am just trying (or not trying) to be open.

Was there a choice in the past? Is there a past/now/future or is there just "no time"?

Hmm, yes there is no time. If the future exist as now and the past exists as now and the now exists as now then there does not even have to be a now as there only is. A sense of time arises, a linear pattern to give a shape of beginning middle and end. But that is just a particular shape. It is perhaps favoured because it is easier to describe, as a square is "easier" to describe than a fractal. But time can only be defined by what it is not. It can only be observed when there is a self observing it.

1) Is there a separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form? Was there ever?

There does not need to be an "I" to distinguish itself from anything or any one. There is "mind", there is "mind activity" but the self if or should it appear is only part of "mind activity". "separate entity" - In the past self has appeared "in mind", separate, creating an illusion of self being a container for the mind.