please lead me through the Gate

[Lib]

Okay my friend. Are you ready for this? I've fully responded to both pages. So I will send these in two batches. We may have to re-visit this "elaboration," thing. :) Just kidding, but you have your work cut out for you. If it is too much, take an extra day and do it in chunks.

I apologize for some long wait times. I know you feel anxious to proceed and your eagerness is great! I will post every day, but there may be some longer gaps. I do take lots of time with your answers.

Sensations can't do anything, they can only get experienced.

Yes. And like thoughts and emotions they are short-lived.

Gerunds now! Having a look at the watch again, memorizing the minutes (58), moving my butt, seeing the sunlight blind me, seeing the green patches on the screen, finding things funny, feeling the butt, feeling the cold foot, hammering the fingers on the keys, hearing my voice saying something, sounding metallic, scratching my head, feeling on the head slowly fades, feeling under the fingernails, too, other side of the head itching, feeling from scratching fading, feeling on fingertips fading, ignoring the next itching for no longer wanting to serve it, scratching under my nose, feeling my chin……

Can you see that life is just happening on it’s own without an “I”, “me” or “self” really needed?

Let’s go just a bit deeper here. Can you revisit some of the above quoted and this time instead of “having a look at the watch,” or “feeling the butt,” or “scratching my head,” eliminate all labels, such as “watch,” “butt,” or “head.” And then eliminate the labels of “feeling”, “scratching,” Just drop thought for a moment and experience pure looking without any labels at all. You can let thought go for a few moments. If it comes back in just let it drift on by on it’s own. Do you see how everything is labeled by thought? Is life occurring fine on it’s own without labels? Can you describe “feeling,” “scratching,” “hammering” without those labels? What is left when you do that? Look carefully and see if you can describe what is left when the labels are removed.

Obviously the I's function is to claim ownership to this body, these thoughts, these feelings, these sensations. And it works as a glue in the sense that it puts together all these fragments to the feeling of being a person. It not only puts them together, but it integrates them, so that they seem to belong not only to the person, but also to each other.

That is very good looking, Well. Is the body ever really owned or controlled in reality by a self? Can the “I” word control anything. Lift one of your hands, either one. Move it to the right, then left. Look with your eyes. Did a self move the hand or did the hand just move on it’s own? Check it out. Which is more true, the hand moved, or a self moved the hand?

How do we “own” or possess something? What is the process? If we took 2 cars side by side, one “yours” and another one. What tells you that "your car" is yours?

[Lib]

'there is nothing permanent at all, I can't know if even life is permanent' and the other one goes: 'all appearances are impermanent, the only permanent 'thing' is where they appear, meaning something like awareness'. I like the first answer more. The second one can be felt as true, but only after diving into all those meanings = thoughts and connected feelings. The first one feels immediately true without any diving. It feels free and safe, because as soon as there is nothing to hold on, there can no longer be on-holding. Freedom is there. I feel really comfortable without anything permanent. (Ok, if there is nothing permanent, then change is permanent, but that's just a paradox which proves the truth of the former statement.

“This made me think.” Let’s look at this thinking. What is happening here?

There is nothing permanent at all…
The only thing permanent is…
The first one feels immediately true…
The second one can be felt as true, but only after….

This is thought using thought to solve a dilemma. Can you see this?
Thought using thought to get answers is a bit like moving furniture around. It will never break through the illusion. Only by looking through direct experience can you do that.

Be a detective. Examine this permanence/impermanence issue in your immediate experience. Look for all the clues. Watch throughout the day, all the appearances that are arising through the senses. The sounds in the street, the visual images, the rote motions of the body, do any of them last? Can you find anything at all in appearances that last? Describe your experience with this. But also, what notices? The comings and going may change but does what notices this ever change?

OK, doing takes place, but this is not a proof of a doer! Great!

Confirm this, please. Notice that the blood flows, the heart beats, does that require a doer? You get an itch and a scratch immediately follows, did that require a controller?Any of the exercises you just did (…..name…..) Did they require a doer?

Life doesn't lead itself anywhere, it just happens.

Sehr Gut! But is this your direct experience? Describe this as it “just happens” in
your own experience.

[well]

Hi Lib,
thank you for the tasks you composed for me and for the sweet German praise!
My answers will probably arrive very late (only on Saturday evening my time perhaps), because I have some jobbing to do here. I'll try to proceed with the tasks whenever possible.
Have a good time,
Well

[Lib]

Not a problem. Thanks for heads up.

[well]

Hi Lib,

thanks for waiting!

I've not done all work, but some, and want to report.

Can you see that life is just happening on it’s own without an “I”, “me” or “self” really needed?

Yes.

What is left when you do that? Look carefully and see if you can describe what is left when the labels are removed.

Without labeling it, it kind of stops existing. I label things into existence. The closer I look at any sensation, the less I sense it. This works everytime I try it.

How do we “own” or possess something? What is the process? If we took 2 cars side by side, one “yours” and another one. What tells you that "your car" is yours?

I need tons of labels at different levels (sensations labeled (like colour), memories like "I bought it", the concept of possession itself ...) to possess something. Possessing seems hard work indeed.

Thought using thought to get answers is a bit like moving furniture around. It will never break through the illusion. Only by looking through direct experience can you do that.

Yes.

The permanence issue doesn't intrigue me any longer, so I don't deal with it. I can't say anything about what notices.

Alright, I'm sending you this being sure you'll make something out of it!

Best,
Well

[Lib]

You are doing great with direct looking. This is soooo important. Gut Gemacht! This is google German so you’ll have to deal with it! :)

Alright, I'm sending you this being sure you'll make something out of it!

Ha! Absolutely, that is what you are here for! But remember there are no wrong answers, only movement. There is nothing to prove here, exception the illusion of self.

The permanence issue doesn't intrigue me any longer, so I don't deal with it. I can't say anything about what notices.

Seeing the impermanence in life as it arises in direct experience is something we were going to look at eventually. It’s good to answer all the questions, Well. They build on each other in ways that will help you see through the illusion. Let me ask this way, do you see anything at all in life that is permanent? Anything at all? Really take a look at this. Is there anything that sticks around? or does it all come and go?

As far as “what notices,” this isn’t a trick question. It’s a matter of looking in your direct experience. Typing is happening, discussion is happening. Can you see that it is noticed? Can you describe what notices? Or is it not describable?

Get very still for a moment, looking out at life arising. Stop all thought for a moment as movement, images, sounds arise. Is noticing happening? Even without all of the labels of thought? Whatever is noticing, is it always there? Is noticing always the case for anything to be experienced?

What is left when you do that? Look carefully and see if you can describe what is left when the labels are removed.

Without labeling it, it kind of stops existing. I label things into existence. The closer I look at any sensation, the less I sense it. This works every time I try it.

It does seem that way, but let’s examine it. Look and see. Where do sensations come from? Can they appear without labeling? Can the thought “I” bring a sensation into existence? Or could the sensation appear, disappear or change on it’s own anyway? Look carefully at this and report.

How do we “own” or possess something? What is the process? If we took 2 cars side by side, one “yours” and another one. What tells you that "your car" is yours?

I need tons of labels at different levels (sensations labeled (like colour), memories like "I bought it", the concept of possession itself ...) to possess something. Possessing seems hard work indeed.

Yes, indeed, good seeing. It is hard work! Can anything you can think of actually be possessed except in thought? Can you think of any “possession” that didn’t require this layering of concepts?

Let’s move on. There is a plan…sort of. We loosen things up. We move. We dig. Always in direct experience. Answer the following questions as thoroughly as you can!

Nothing exists outside the present moment. Can you find anything, anything at all, that does?
And next: How do you conceive the 'self' or 'I'/ 'me' that you hold 'yourself' to be?

Now look directly at the flow of experiencing. Where in that flow does the 'self' that you conceive reside? Can it be found, at all?

[Lib]

A little correction on a sentence, other wise it won't make sense.
Should read: Can you think of ANYTHING that could actually be possessed except in thought?

[well]

Thank you, Lib. Looking forward to the new exploring.
By the way, I admit that I cannot restrict myself to completely avoiding other so-called spiritual topics/practice. I don't feel disturbed by it, and I hope you don't mind either.
You'll be hearing from me tomorrow,
Well

[well]

Well! ;)

Let me ask this way, do you see anything at all in life that is permanent? Anything at all? Really take a look at this. Is there anything that sticks around? or does it all come and go?

My first idea to approach this question was to have a look at my lifetime to see, if there was anything permanent. But then I realized that by doing so, I would only explore memories instead of directly looking at what is now. So: among all these things that I perceive right now, visually, tangible, hearing - is there anything permanent? Most obviously not! Closing my eyes, chaging position - the most simple actions change perception completely. And not only actions change perceptions, but even without changing the perception channels things change - in the evening, it's getting dark and I won't see any longer. I could fall asleep from bore and perception will totally be disrupted. Even if I don't look but think, it's most obvious that every single thing I could think of is impermanent, according to science (physics, history, psychology, biology - they all say the same). So: a clear no!

As far as “what notices,” this isn’t a trick question. It’s a matter of looking in your direct experience. Typing is happening, discussion is happening. Can you see that it is noticed? Can you describe what notices? Or is it not describable?

Yes, noticing is also happening, and it is as impermanent as all the rest. It feels like noticing only takes place in about 5% of the time (rough guess). Or perhaps even less. Perhaps noticing doesn't exist at all? This is tricky! Like: does the mirror know what it reflects? The mirror doesn't know, and noticing doesn't happen. Noticing is like the substance of perception already, they are not divided. There is something like focus, and under focus all things dissolve. Noticing is something less intrusive than focus. It is more like "the thing itself", like perception and noticing and the thing itself are one. So the answer to the question : 'what notices' would be: appearance? reality? life? I'll leave it like this for the moment and continue with the other questions.

I see you gave me another hint:

Get very still for a moment, looking out at life arising. Stop all thought for a moment as movement, images, sounds arise. Is noticing happening? Even without all of the labels of thought? Whatever is noticing, is it always there? Is noticing always the case for anything to be experienced?

Is noticing happening?

There is something like a floating. Noticing takes place, and sometimes noticing can be labeled and at the same time attracts a focus (these two seem to happen at the same point of time). As soon as it did that, it would no longer call it noticing but thought. So: is noticing happening? Yes.

Is noticing happening?

ONLY without all the labels of thought (see above).

Whatever is noticing, is it always there?

I cannot find something that notices, I can only find noticing. So is noticing always there? Let's try:
Noticing seems to be continuously there. Even if there is a thought 'disrupting' it, it is not really disrupted because the thought also is being noticed.

Is noticing always the case for anything to be experienced?

Definitely yes. Wow, I didn't know that! Thank you for the insight, which you uncovered to me! Smashing.

Having to leave for a date. Bye!

[Lib]

I look forward to your other answers, Well. They will tie in nicely with this.
(Hope that date was fun!)

I cannot find something that notices, I can only find noticing.

Perfect!

So is noticing always there? Let's try:

Noticing seems to be continuously there. Even if there is a thought 'disrupting' it, it is not really disrupted because the thought also is being noticed.

Again, perfect! Spot on.

Is noticing always the case for anything to be experienced?

Definitely yes. Wow, I didn't know that! Thank you for the insight, which you uncovered to me! Smashing.

Let’s go a bit further with this.

This noticing. Yes, there is an alert presence there - knowing and aliveness.

Go back to this thoughtless noticing often. Abide in it as long as thought is quiet.

Answer these questions with this alert, thoughtless noticing.

Does this noticing ever come and go? Or is it always there?
Even in sleep, is stirring in the night noticed?
Does this noticing have thoughts, emotions and sensations? Or
are these things just noticed?
Is it the body or brain doing this noticing, or is the body and brain
just noticed?
Is the character Well (with all of her unique characteristics) doing the
noticing, or is Well with her unique characteristics noticed?
Is there ever anything else but this? Appearances arising, and noticing happening?
Is a “self” or “I” required or is everything happening on it’s own just fine without a self?
Is any kind of a controller or do-er necessary for noticing to happen?

Spend some time with this. I will look forward to your answers.

Lib

[well]

Hello Lib,

thanks for your response. Before reading it, I fabricated this message, which I am forwarding now:

Where do sensations come from? Can they appear without labeling? Can the thought “I” bring a sensation into existence? Or could the sensation appear, disappear or change on it’s own anyway?

Where do sensations come from?

They don't come FROM somewhere, they are what is. There is nothing but them, meaning you have two choices: sensation or blank. I can notice sensations, can I also notice blank? Yes, blank is what sensations are 'surrounded by'. But I don't feel that they come out of it. There is no development, sensations and blank exist at the same level, without one producing the other.

No, I have to correct this: there is no blank surrounding the sensations. This blank is also a sensation. So where do all these sensations come from? Noticing and sensations seem to be the same.

Can they appear without labeling?

Yes, they can (see above)

Can the thought “I” bring a sensation into existence?

No, that seems absurd! What can a thought do anyway?

Code: Select all

Or could the sensation appear, disappear or change on it’s own anyway?

Yes, it is like that.

Can anything you can think of actually be possessed except in thought? Can you think of any “possession” that didn’t require this layering of concepts?

No. It doesn't seem to be a question of possessing, but of identification somehow. I don't possess (so-called) things or sensations, but I can't find any I apart from sensations, so this makes me feel like I am sensations. Or rather I am noticing. Which should be the same after all said.

Nothing exists outside the present moment. Can you find anything, anything at all, that does?

'The present moment' - what a nice name for something nobody can understand! Because: how long is the present moment? It has no extension, and it is not nill, so what can we know about it? We can learn something from it: time doesn't exist! Memories exist as thoughts, in the present moment. Eternity exist, as a thought, in the present moment. Eternity is also the result of knowing the present moment as such never changes - only the sensations in it change.

And next: How do you conceive the 'self' or 'I'/ 'me' that you hold 'yourself' to be?

Yes, indeed, how do I? I kind of take/feel it to be the source of everything, as if everything were under control or influence or in the responsibility realm of the self, or as if it were the guardian that only lets pass to consciousness things that fit to 'me' = my idea of myself. I didn't know that either. Why did I never look?

Now I'm going to work on your new questions:

Does this noticing ever come and go? Or is it always there?

It is always there, but it is not always noticed.

Even in sleep, is stirring in the night noticed?

Yes, stirring in the night is noticed. If noticing were inactivated during sleep, how could people hear their alarm clocks?

Does this noticing have thoughts, emotions and sensations?

No, it doesn't

Or are these things just noticed?

Yes.

Is it the body or brain doing this noticing, or is the body and brain
just noticed?

Does the body notice? No, the body gets noticed.
Does the brain notice? I see no sign for the popular assumption that noticing takes place in the brain, nor that the brain is its originator. This assumption is really lacking evidence. Perhaps it is so popular because the brain itself can not be sensed, different from all other parts of the body, to which body sensations can be attributed. So, does the brain notice? Is there a clue that can prove that it is not the brain that notices? Hmmm.... I'm not able to decide whether the brain secretly does the noticing. Yes, there is a clue. Noticing is continuous, whereas the brain is not (brain cells grow and die and so on).

Is the character Well (with all of her unique characteristics) doing the
noticing, or is Well with her unique characteristics noticed?

Well is clearly noticed.

Is there ever anything else but this? Appearances arising, and noticing happening?

I don't know if there are always necessarily appearances. Probably noticing is possible without appearances. Besides this, the answer is no.

Is a “self” or “I” required or is everything happening on it’s own just fine without a self?

Everything happens very smoothly without any self interfering and claiming.

Is any kind of a controller or do-er necessary for noticing to happen?

No. A do-er would be a hindrance. A do-er's output would be focus (which makes sensation dissolve and replaces it by noticing the focus instead) or a label/thought, which would transform/replace a sensation by something that makes an element of identity.

Pooh, that's heavy stuff - like quantum physics in the consciousness realm. But much easier, as you just have to look instead of using particle accelerators. And you have to be lucky to come across someone who asks the right questions in a way that makes you try and find an answer ... lucky me!

It's your turn!

[Lib]

Some good DE. (Direct Experience) looking, Well. A few things to go over.
There is no room for ambiguity, seeing needs to be perfectly clear.

Noticing and sensations seem to be the same.

I can't find any I apart from sensations, so this makes me feel like I am sensations. Or rather I am noticing. Which should be the same after all said.

This is very clear looking. Just a few more questions to really lock this in. So sit in thoughtless, alert noticing. Aware-ing. Different objects are seen, sounds come and go, feelings shift in the body.
Where, if any, are the boundaries between what is being seen, the seeing process itself and the seer?
Is the perceived (what is noticed) ever separate from the perceiver?
What is it that makes the object or sensation seem separate or independent from the noticing?
Look at the most distant object in the room and compare it to the nearest object in the room. What makes the object near or far? What do you notice when you remove all labels of “near” or “far?”
Can you say, in DE, that appearances all form a seamless whole?

Can anything you can think of actually be possessed except in thought? Can you think of any “possession” that didn’t require this layering of concepts?

No. It doesn't seem to be a question of possessing, but of identification somehow.

Let’s look in DE. Can you describe the mechanism for how an illusory self identifies (or takes possession) with thought? What is the difference between “my cup” and “a cup?” Between “I am a runner,” and “running is happening?” Describe only with DE.

Nothing exists outside the present moment. Can you find anything, anything at all, that does?

Memories exist as thoughts, in the present moment. Eternity exist, as a thought, in the present moment.

Past is only in thought, future is only in thought. So look right now. Nothing exists outside this immediate and direct experience of noticing. In your direct experience, can you find anything at all that does? Report.

And next: How do you conceive the 'self' or 'I'/ 'me' that you hold 'yourself' to be?

Yes, indeed, how do I? I kind of take/feel it to be the source of everything, as if everything were under control or influence or in the responsibility realm of the self, or as if it were the guardian that only lets pass to consciousness things that fit to 'me' = my idea of myself. I didn't know that either. Why did I never look?

Let’s talk for a minute about what is real and what isn’t. What real is what comes through the senses, what still exists even if you don’t believe it. A table is real. Words like “University” or “Forum” are labels, pointing to a symbol used for referencing. Santa Claus is not real.

Santa has a name, personality, dress code, and unique characteristics that make him Santa. Well has a name, personality, dress code and unique characteristics that make her Well. One day someone told you Santa didn’t exist and all of your “solid” evidence gave way and the belief fell apart. Is Well any more real than Santa? Can you see that Well is just a label?

Probably noticing is possible without appearances.

You have looked very clearly with the noticing. Just one thing to clear up.
If “noticing and sensations are the same,” is noticing possible without something to be noticed?

Is any kind of a controller or do-er necessary for noticing to happen?

No. A do-er would be a hindrance. A do-er's output would be focus (which makes sensation dissolve and replaces it by noticing the focus instead) or a label/thought, which would transform/replace a sensation by something that makes an element of identity.

Thought is trying to help you with your investigation. Very easy to do, it is so automatic. So is this a “no” from direct experience?

Pooh, that's heavy stuff - like quantum physics in the consciousness realm. But much easier, as you just have to look instead of using particle accelerators. And you have to be lucky to come across someone who asks the right questions in a way that makes you try and find an answer ... lucky me!

Quantum Looking! We can create particle accelerators with thought. But can’t use thought to investigate self. It’s like a closed circle of thoughts that goes nowhere. Like arguments with boyfriends :) You have to go beyond thought.

Let’s talk about thought.

From direct experience, please answer:

Where do thoughts come from? Once they are formed where do they go?
Is one thought different from another?
Can you control your thoughts?
Can you think two thoughts at the same time?
Do you know what the next thought will be?
Can a thought think?
When you drop all thought what is left?

[well]

Hello Lib, you libbed me!

Here is my work of yesterday eve and today:

Thank you for your patience. Thank you for again reminding me that DE is required and thoughts are not.

If “noticing and sensations are the same,” is noticing possible without something to be noticed?

No, it isn't - and this makes 'me as a person' completely useless. Thank you so much for detailing and insisting in this. Sensations and noticing are the same, and they don't depend on me as a seer. The Noticing/sensations is me. It's everything that exists. Noticing/sensations, the present moment, I, is all the same. Beyond that - nothing.

So sit in thoughtless, alert noticing. Aware-ing. Different objects are seen, sounds come and go, feelings shift in the body. Where, if any, are the boundaries between what is being seen, the seeing process itself and the seer?

Sensations and noticing are the same. I don't find a seer. Which I doesn't find a seer? The noticing doesn't find a seer. Can noticing search? No. Who is searching for the seer? There's no searching for the seer now – there's searching for the boundaries, remember. Boundaries between sensation and noticing: none. Boundaries between noticing and noticer: I don't know what that is supposed to be, the noticer. I can't find any. Who can't find any? Who finds the sensation and the noticing? The 'labeling machine' 'finds' the sensations. The 'labeling machine' also finds the noticing. The seer is the labeling. There is no boundary between the sensation and the labeling/seer. What about the boundary between noticing and seer? There is no boundary either. Answer: no boundaries between what is being seen, the seeing process and the seer.

Is the perceived (what is noticed) ever separate from the perceiver?

No.

What is it that makes the object or sensation seem separate or independent from the noticing?

The illusion of self does it.

Look at the most distant object in the room and compare it to the nearest object in the room. What makes the object near or far?

The imagination that I have to get up and go there in order to reach it makes it far. A story makes it far. At the level of sensation, it is as near as everything.

What do you notice when you remove all labels of “near” or “far?”

I'm flat. There's no space. That's funny! Easy, delightful. Everything is here. Things and me are one. All very friendly. No problem whatsoever. Playful.

Can you say, in DE, that appearances all form a seamless whole?

Yes.

Let’s look in DE. Can you describe the mechanism for how an illusory self identifies (or takes possession) with thought?

It does by separating. At first it separates, then it relates again through thought. Thought is like a thing that holds the gap open between illusory self and thing/sensation.

What is the difference between “my cup” and “a cup?” Between “I am a runner,” and “running is happening?” Describe only with DE.

'A cup' is me. 'My cup' is separate from (illusory) me.
'I am a runner' dirscriminates (illusory) me from running. 'Running is happening' identifies me with running.

Past is only in thought, future is only in thought. So look right now. Nothing exists outside this immediate and direct experience of noticing. In your direct experience, can you find anything at all that does? Report.

In my direct experience, I can't find anything existing outside.

Is Well any more real than Santa? Can you see that Well is just a label?

I can see that Well is just a label. It is a composition of thoughts, also called history.

If “noticing and sensations are the same,” is noticing possible without something to be noticed?

No. They are the same. Noticing is happening on its own. It is the only thing happening at all.

Where do thoughts come from?

They sprout from the gap beween illusory me and things, at the same time building up that gap. They 'materialize' out of nowhere. Some dock with sensations, some dock with the previous thought, some dock with illusory self. They all somehow belong to or sustain illusory self.

Once they are formed where do they go?

At first they contribute to illusory self, then they dissolve.

Is one thought different from another?

Their content is different, their form is not.

Can you control your thoughts?

No. (Illusory self believes it can.)

Can you think two thoughts at the same time?

No.

Do you know what the next thought will be?

No!

Can a thought think?

How am I supposed to know what thoughts are able to do, I am not a thought! (joke) No, it can't.

When you drop all thought what is left?

Life itself, peace, presence, ...

[Lib]

Sehr, sehr gut! Now, some very important opportunities are here. Everything ties together. So use direct experience only and answer every question as best you can.

Let’s look in DE. Can you describe the mechanism for how an illusory self identifies (or takes possession) with thought?

It does by separating. At first it separates, then it relates again through thought. Thought is like a thing that holds the gap open between illusory self and thing/sensation.

Experience happens and the “I” steps in to take possession. Can you see how this only happens in thought? Can there ever really be any identification with an appearance, or possession of an appearance except in thought? Be clear on this. Go through your list of “possessions.” (My car, my dog,….etc.) Go through your list of “identifications.” (My political party, my educational accomplishments). Does this occur anywhere except in thought? Don’t accept this on face value. Really look and see.

If “noticing and sensations are the same,” is noticing possible without something to be noticed?

No, it isn't - and this makes 'me as a person' completely useless. Thank you so much for detailing and insisting in this. Sensations and noticing are the same, and they don't depend on me as a seer. The Noticing/sensations is me. It's everything that exists. Noticing/sensations, the present moment, I, is all the same. Beyond that - nothing.

What do you notice when you remove all labels of “near” or “far?”

I'm flat. There's no space. That's funny! Easy, delightful. Everything is here. Things and me are one.

What is the difference between “my cup” and “a cup?” Between “I am a runner,” and “running is happening?” Describe only with DE.

'A cup' is me. 'My cup' is separate from (illusory) me.
'I am a runner' dirscriminates (illusory) me from running. 'Running is happening' identifies me with running.

Some good looking but we have a lot of “me’s” that need sorting out. The labels “I”, “my”, “me,” are linguistic conventions. Almost every language uses a subject-object construction and pronouns. So we can’t escape it in language. The trick is to see through the illusion that these labels refer to any object in reality. Is there any “me” except the illusory me? Look and see.

“I am flat,”
“things and me are one.”
“A cup is me.”
“The noticing sensations is me.”

Who is the “I” and “me” in these sentences? Is there a big expanded me and a little illusory me? Or is there only life happening? Look very carefully in DE and see if this is the case. Discuss what you see.

Let’s try getting rid of the noun “me” all together. Only verbs. Example: Instead of “I am flat,” becomes “flatness is happening.” Continue with the rest. Is there any me at all, big or little? Or only life happening? Be very clear on this seeing.

What is it that makes the object or sensation seem separate or independent from the noticing?

The illusion of self does it.

Let’s continue to pin this down. What is the illusion of self? What is “I”? How is a separate, illusory entity created? What is a label? What is this troublemaker “me” exactly? (Hint: Look at the answers in the next two questions and answers below.) Elaborate.

(1) Is Well any more real than Santa? Can you see that Well is just a label?

I can see that Well is just a label. It is a composition of thoughts…

(2) Look at the most distant object in the room and compare it to the nearest object in the room. What makes the object near or far?

A story makes it far.

Yes. And what is a story?

Sensations and noticing are the same. I don't find a seer. Which I doesn't find a seer? The noticing doesn't find a seer.

Ahhh, yes, Well, you are starting to get this right here. Confirm. Is there a notice-er or just noticing?

Where do thoughts come from?

They sprout from the gap between illusory me and things, at the same time building up that gap. They 'materialize' out of nowhere. Some dock with sensations, some dock with the previous thought, some dock with illusory self. They all somehow belong to or sustain illusory self.

Love your “docking” analogy! Yes, thoughts just appear. They come, they go. They dissolve like fast moving clouds if we don’t reel them back in.

Can thoughts think?

How am I supposed to know what thoughts are able to do, I am not a thought! (joke)

Ah ha. “I am not a thought.” Is this true? Look and see. What is the “I” word? What is the illusory me?

The main peg, holding up the whole tent, the whole illusion is “me,” that to which life happens. And without the “me” what is going on?

When you drop all thought what is left?

Life itself, peace, presence, …

Anything else happening, or is this it?

Looking forward to your responses,

Lib

[Lib]

p.s. I apologize. The post is long, but many of the questions have to do with the same issues. So we clear that up and we should get manageable again.