Knock Knock

[forgetmenot]

Thank you for letting me know, Julian!

Love, Kay
xx

[JulianS]

Hi Kay!!!

Ok let´s see...

How is it known that the sound is the sound of “the word”?

It´s not known. It´s a thought posterior interpretation to the experience of the color red, and the sound "green". The sound "green" is an AE, no doubt about that. But is just than, an experience of a thought-sound. Thought later interpret it as it that shape caused the experience.
In AE, what a word would be?? Colours, this case red.

So, forgetting is not known. What is known (AE) is label/thoughts + sensation + colour.

Don´t find the colour component in the AE.

Is thought an actual sound, like a ‘bird’ when the sound ‘bird’ appears, if not then how is thought a sound? Thought is known, but is it actually ‘heard’?

Don´t find even that sounds are "heard". Sounds are sounds. Thoguhts are thoughts. Of course there´s a difference. Somehow the difference is known. In AE however, when "someone" is talking to "me", the experience is pretty much similar as the thought voice talking. I mean, I won´t confuse experiences, but they are so similar that can´t find difference in AE.
It´s a noise. Thats how thought is a sound, its some noise happening. Just as those bird- noises. It´s not "heard", as I said, I assume that when you say "heard" you refer to the way that "external" sounds are perceived, but actually kind of don´t even understand what "heard" would be appart from a thought saying "Im hearing that sound", sounds are sounds, not "heard" or "known" sounds, don´t find that experience of "hearing" them, wich i would need to, in order to compare them with thoughts.



So... the thought excercices... You shoot some questions hehehe. Will leave the first one for the last.

First of all

Here is a thought exercise. Sit quietly for about 30 minutes and notice the arising thoughts. Just let them appear as they appear. Try your best to COMPLETELY ignore what they are saying and just notice how they appear, without you doing anything at all.

It has been very interesting, would love to keep doing this excercise, think Ive got to keep seeing, specially the first question. Reallised that somehow, any"thing" that i could "know", I mean, knowing what some "thing" is or isn´t, that whole spectrum of experience is found ONLY in thought content. Don´t know well how to express this.

The thing is Kay, don´t know if lacking some skill here or what, but I can´t see the moment a thought appear. Can´t "separate" from them to see that. And can´t ignore what they are saying, not completely. I mean, can´t "ignore" them, because they are here! The very fact they are here implies that I´m not ignoring them.
Think I got what you point to however.

So, "thought" is a label. Pointing to the experience of this "mental" stuff that appears being words (sound) or images. Somehow they are not so nitid and well defined as the "external" sounds and images.
Can´t find the precise moment that a thought appears, specially the image-thoughts. I mean, can´t pinpoint to it without another thought. I can notice they appearing (What I cant is not noticing them).

Could you have done anything to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead?

No.

Where are they coming from and going to

When they pass they go to the thought cementary. Hehehhehee.

Coming from no-place, and going nowhere, ie, not that I experience a transparent place that is called "no-place" from where thoughts are coming, actually don´t experience some place from where they are coming, and where they are going. I mean, don´t even experience thoughts "coming" and "going". Just experiencing thought when it´s here.

Can you predict your next thought?Can you choose not to have painful or negative thoughts?

No.

Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?

No, where I would pick them from???

Is it possible to control any thoughts?

No.

Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Including the thought 'I'?

Hell no!!! Thought is an appearance!!!!! How would you prevent an appearance???? I mean, will need to have the experience of a thought that hasn´t been experienced yet and don´t allow it to appear hehehehhehee.
So you just go to the unexperienced thought section (end of the half to the left in the no-place building from where they are coming) and find the thought that hadn´t been experienced yet and being reeeeally reaaally carefull not to experience them in the process, you throw it to the trash.

Same to thought I. Can´t prevent it.

It seems that thought has some logical ordered appearance, but look carefully and just notice if there is an organised sequence? Or is that just another thought that says ‘these thoughts are in sequence’ or “they take content from previous thought”, or that ‘one thought follows another thought’?

There is no organised sequence. Some thoughts may say "thoughts are talking about the same topic" but, AE, just this thought appearing. The only way I can say this is is true is consulting a thought to give me the answer, not AE (same for all other questions). No doubt thought content can keep telling this! Will, probably; luckily that doesn´t make it true.

Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear?

Okay Kay, this is the question.

My definite AE answer is no.

With images-thoughts is evident.

With voice-thoughts, there was, and is, a lot of resistance to see.
"Resistance" meaning that in thought content, lot of "No, I am the one who is telling this precise sentence". So I ask, what is that actual experience? And just found the sentence. And then "I have to be!!!!" Again. So, as Im learning from you I see wheter I find any evidence whatsoever to support those claims. Don´t find anything other than sensations and thoughts.
Somehow it is still believed, and with that, surprisingly enough, found that the ONLY way that "believing" can be found, IS IN THOUGHT CONTENT. Crazyness!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Believe is thought content, not something I could get rid of.
So, think I have to keep with this one. Feels like Im close to something.

So, asking, can I take this sitting quietly and observing thoughts as an excercise for the next days?

Okay Kay, that´s it for now....

Big hug, Julian

[forgetmenot]

Good morning dear Julian,

How is it known that the sound is the sound of “the word”?

In AE, what a word would be?? Colours, this case red.

Yes…written words are the AE of colour! NICE! Verbally spoken words are AE of sound. It is thought that interprets what is said aloud verbally as verbalised thoughts, however, they are just AE of sound. So, to me, thoughts are not heard they are simply known. But whether or not 'mental thoughts' are sound or not, really doesn't matter in the bigger picture :)

So, forgetting is not known. What is known (AE) is label/thoughts + sensation + colour.

Don´t find the colour component in the AE.

When I close my eyes, an imprint or outline of a self appears. If I am sitting then the imprint of a ‘me’ sitting appears…this is what I label as ‘colour’, because it is an image. Other say it is thought because thought comes in pictures or as words. So when I LOOK and this imprint/outline/image appears, I look and ask myself if that image knows anything about ‘forgetting’, for example (depends on what I am addressing via the looking). That is why I add image/colour.

Here is a thought exercise. Sit quietly for about 30 minutes and notice the arising thoughts. Just let them appear as they appear. Try your best to COMPLETELY ignore what they are saying and just notice how they appear, without you doing anything at all.

It has been very interesting, would love to keep doing this excercise, think Ive got to keep seeing, specially the first question. Reallised that somehow, any"thing" that i could "know", I mean, knowing what some "thing" is or isn´t, that whole spectrum of experience is found ONLY in thought content. Don´t know well how to express this.

YES….you have hit the nail on the head! Knowing ABOUT something is thought while the knowing AS (the appearance ie sound, thought, smell, taste etc) is direct/actual.

And by all means, keep doing the exercise if you so wish :)

The thing is Kay, don´t know if lacking some skill here or what, but I can´t see the moment a thought appear. Can´t "separate" from them to see that. And can´t ignore what they are saying, not completely. I mean, can´t "ignore" them, because they are here! The very fact they are here implies that I´m not ignoring them.
Think I got what you point to however.

Yes, what “Ignore what they are saying” means, is just watch them as they appear and don’t get caught up with what they are saying. It’s to watch them like you would watch a movie or like you watch clouds as they move through the sky.

So, "thought" is a label. Pointing to the experience of this "mental" stuff that appears being words (sound) or images. Somehow they are not so nitid and well defined as the "external" sounds and images.
Can´t find the precise moment that a thought appears, specially the image-thoughts. I mean, can´t pinpoint to it without another thought. I can notice they appearing (What I cant is not noticing them).

Here is a step-by-step description of how to look at thoughts. First thing is to sit for at least 10-15 minutes quietly somewhere, close the eyes and just notice thoughts and do this several times throughout the day and then do the exercise throughout the day as per instructions below.

1. Notice the current thought that is present.
Like when you sit observing the body, a thought might arise “this is my feet” or “here is a pain” or “my breathing is too quick” or “I am bored with this exercise” or “I have better things to do” or any sorts of thoughts.

2. This thought will pass and another thought will come. So just observe this thought passing.

3. Then wait for the next thought to come.

4. When the next thought is present, just notice it, and see how it passes.

5. Then wait for the next thought to come.

6. Repeat #4 and #5 many-many times.

Between the 2 thoughts there is a gap. It can be very short or subtle, just a second or a few seconds before the next thought come in.

This is how to look at thoughts.
Looking how they come and go.
And observing the short gap between them.
Noticing how the current thought is passing.
And waiting for the next thought to come.

Please do the following exercise:
Throughout your waking day, try to observe the gap between thoughts as often as possible. It can be done by noticing that ‘thinking’ is happening right now, then stop and just simply wait for the next thought to come. In the ‘waiting’ there is a gap between two thoughts.

Let me know how you go.

Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?

No, where I would pick them from???

Exactly! Where indeed!! :)

Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Including the thought 'I'?

Hell no!!! Thought is an appearance!!!!! How would you prevent an appearance???? I mean, will need to have the experience of a thought that hasn´t been experienced yet and don´t allow it to appear hehehehhehee.

Nice :)

So you just go to the unexperienced thought section (end of the half to the left in the no-place building from where they are coming) and find the thought that hadn´t been experienced yet and being reeeeally reaaally carefull not to experience them in the process, you throw it to the trash.

LOL!

Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear?

Okay Kay, this is the question.
My definite AE answer is no.
With images-thoughts is evident.
With voice-thoughts, there was, and is, a lot of resistance to see.
"Resistance" meaning that in thought content, lot of "No, I am the one who is telling this precise sentence". So I ask, what is that actual experience? And just found the sentence. And then "I have to be!!!!" Again. So, as Im learning from you I see wheter I find any evidence whatsoever to support those claims. Don´t find anything other than sensations and thoughts.

I just love the way you look to find evidence to support thoughts claims. Just keep on doing that!

Somehow it is still believed, and with that, surprisingly enough, found that the ONLY way that "believing" can be found, IS IN THOUGHT CONTENT. Crazyness!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Believe is thought content, not something I could get rid of.
So, think I have to keep with this one. Feels like Im close to something.

YES! Belief is just content of thought! Can you find anyone that can or is believing anything?

So, asking, can I take this sitting quietly and observing thoughts as an excercise for the next days?

Sure, as you see I have added another thought exercise for you to do if you would like to. Let me know when you are ready to continue.

Love, Kay
xx

[JulianS]

Hi Kay

Just letting you know will spend some more time with my friends thoughts :D

Big hug,
Julian

[forgetmenot]

Thanks Julian! :) <3

[JulianS]

Hi Kay :)

So, lets write a bit

When I close my eyes, an imprint or outline of a self appears. If I am sitting then the imprint of a ‘me’ sitting appears…this is what I label as ‘colour’, because it is an image. Other say it is thought because thought comes in pictures or as words. So when I LOOK and this imprint/outline/image appears, I look and ask myself if that image knows anything about ‘forgetting’, for example (depends on what I am addressing via the looking). That is why I add image/colour.

Okay, understood. Totally get what you are saying here, really helpful.

Please do the following exercise:
Throughout your waking day, try to observe the gap between thoughts as often as possible. It can be done by noticing that ‘thinking’ is happening right now, then stop and just simply wait for the next thought to come. In the ‘waiting’ there is a gap between two thoughts.

Let me know how you go.

So, it has been interesting observing thoughts, will write couple of things below, but with total honesty i will say that im not finding that "gap" experience you talk about here...

So, sometimes thought says "right there, there was a gap" that is an experience of thought talking ABOUT a gap.
Or "did i just experience a gap?" Maybe, "I cant experience it" or "I just experienced it". Doesn´t matter, just found that gap thing in thought content. Sometimes experience of sound or colour or sensation become evident when waiting for the next thought, but that doesn´t mean there´s a "gap", does it? Pretty sure i wouldn´t be able to recognice a gap "thing" an "objetc" gap without a thought saying "that is". Some frustration sometimes<---- AE thoughts saying "cant do it" and some sensations, maybe sometimes that outline image of a body me, all together in a bag labelled frustration.

Should I keep trying?


Sitting has been lovely, experienced calmness couple of times, and kind of a more palpable experience of letting thoughts pass as clouds sometimes... Like I don´t give a shit, they are all liers ehehehehehehehe...

Have to say, it has been more frequent to see thoughts going than to caught them in their arrival. Kind of a frequent experience of a thought saying "Oh, that thought was there and didn´t even notice it, so no gap". Sometimes however, specially the automatic coments on things or the future planning thoughts, their arrising is pretty evident.

Nothing that could be found in thought content is true.

So, although I carried on with the excercise in everyday activities, I also sat sometimes, and it kind of gave a possibility of more sharp looking.

So, I kept the first question of the other day. The one that asks if I am doing something to make a thought appear.
So... curiosusly enough, as I probably said it couple days ago, no doubts of this regarding the image thoughts, the automatic label thoughts, the "future" thoughts, and the remembering thoughts, they definitely arise automatically. But there´s this guy hehehehe the "talking to myself" kind of thought.
So keep on watching, how the hell could it be that Im not making some thoughts arise and some others yes? Well, it isn´t. Reflect on what the hell is there to sustain that claim, looked up, down, below behind, strangely, a sensation get pointened sometimes, a sensation in the head, a changing and floating sensation, and a image of a someone thinking. So those are actual experiences, but that doesn´t mean that there is a "me" speaking some of the thoughts arround. (To look this, I took a long time sitting)
Keeping inquiring like this, it started becoming evident that all thoughts are.... arrisings. Spontaneous arrisings. Aparently caused by the "situation" <---- I mean apparently because this is a truth that can only be found in thought content (think the last question the other day adressed this). And it´s kind of getting clear, but its also like if there is some "resistance" <------ no AE of this, just a thought saying it must be, to completelly acept this fact, that the voice talking is not "my" voice and that there´s no control over it whatsoever. Have to surrender to evidence I guess...

So doing the excersise it was sometimes impossible not to think about thinking you know?? Hehehehehehe. No control over thought, I would so shut up them any moment if I could.

YES! Belief is just content of thought! Can you find anyone that can or is believing anything?

Don´t know how would that be, a some one, what will it look like? So there is this thought-made image of a body..... Can´t find it outside of thought. Definitely thought talks about a me who believes and have to disbelieve something, but that´s all for it, that thought passes, end of that story, end of that character.


Will keep looking, thank you a lot lovely Kay,
Big hug
:)

[forgetmenot]

Hello from a wet and windy day Downunder!

Throughout your waking day, try to observe the gap between thoughts
Let me know how you go.

So, it has been interesting observing thoughts, will write couple of things below, but with total honesty i will say that im not finding that "gap" experience you talk about here...
So, sometimes thought says "right there, there was a gap" that is an experience of thought talking ABOUT a gap.

Yes, exactly, nice LOOKING. Thought is known but is a gap known?

Or "did i just experience a gap?" Maybe, "I cant experience it" or "I just experienced it". Doesn´t matter, just found that gap thing in thought content. Sometimes experience of sound or colour or sensation become evident when waiting for the next thought, but that doesn´t mean there´s a "gap", does it?

Beautiful! Experience is appearing as sound, taste, smell, thought, colour and sensation, not the other way round, so they are all ‘made of’ the same substance ie experience/THIS. So, there is never a gap, there is never anything missing or empty.

Silence is no different to sound. Only thought says some 'thing' isn't there.
Darkness is just a colour, like any other, no different from light. Thought labels darkness as the absence of some 'thing' but it is no less knowing/known than light is.
Empty space is no different to solid matter, it is still a some 'thing', not a lack of some 'thing' It is just a thought that says something could be missing, that something could be empty.

Should I keep trying?

Nope, I think you got to see that there is no gap. Even if it seems there is a gap…there are no gaps, because the gap is experience/THIS showing up as a gap!

Sitting has been lovely, experienced calmness couple of times, and kind of a more palpable experience of letting thoughts pass as clouds sometimes... Like I don´t give a shit, they are all liers ehehehehehehehe...

Lovely, Julian. Eventually this is what it is like…all thoughts are just seen as thought and they no longer have the stickiness…but that takes time and it happens when it happens.

Have to say, it has been more frequent to see thoughts going than to caught them in their arrival. Kind of a frequent experience of a thought saying "Oh, that thought was there and didn´t even notice it, so no gap". Sometimes however, specially the automatic coments on things or the future planning thoughts, their arrising is pretty evident.

Could it be that attention just moves? Is there a ‘you’ guiding where attention goes?
Even if you were caught in thought; that is just what is happening. Everything is running on automatic

Nothing that could be found in thought content is true.

Not everything is story.
It looks like it could be until you look a little closer.
Sound "tweet" isn't story, but story can say that a blue bird down the street made that sound.
Taste labelled as "sweet" isn't a story, but story can be, "I love chocolate."
Colours/image labelled as “sunset” isn't story, but thought could say, "Wow! What a spectacular sunset!"
Now, if image labelled "sunset," isn't experience as you presently find it to be, then it IS story.
See the difference?

So, I kept the first question of the other day. The one that asks if I am doing something to make a thought appear.
So... curiosusly enough, as I probably said it couple days ago, no doubts of this regarding the image thoughts, the automatic label thoughts, the "future" thoughts, and the remembering thoughts, they definitely arise automatically. But there´s this guy hehehehe the "talking to myself" kind of thought.

Sometimes you hear a song on the radio on your way to work or while you are cooking or doing something, and that song can stay with you all day. The song seems to play over and over again. All the intricate details are there. All the lyrics, all the notes in the guitar solo are as clear as when it was playing out of the car speakers. But really there is no music playing - no one singing, and no guitarist. It's just thought about sound.

No matter what thoughts are labelled as ie past, future, current, talk to self, believing, unpleasant, pleasant, negative, positive, calming, fearful etc….thoughts are just thoughts. There is no hierarchy in thought. One thought is not more important or meaningful to another. Thought are just an appearance. It is only a thought that says that thoughts are different and some are more important and meaningful than others.

However, do you need a thought to tell you when sound or colour or taste or smell or sensation or thought have appeared?

So keep on watching, how the hell could it be that Im not making some thoughts arise and some others yes? Well, it isn´t. Reflect on what the hell is there to sustain that claim, looked up, down, below behind, strangely, a sensation get pointened sometimes, a sensation in the head, a changing and floating sensation, and a image of a someone thinking.

It is generally believed that thoughts are coming from the head somewhere around the forehead. When we try to trace back the origin of a thought, it is often believed that it's coming from the forehead, because the attention automatically goes to the sensation of the forehead. Investigate this carefully as often as you can throughout the day.

What is the forehead in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image (of a forehead), right?

So, can a thought come from a sensation?
Can a thought come from a mental image?

Have a very deep look here... the forehead is one of the 'residence' of the SENSE of self. Or rather say, the sensation that is labelled as forehead is believed to be one of the location of the sense of self.

Love, Kay

[JulianS]

Hi kay
Been reeeeeeally busy today. Will write tomorrow

Good night
:)

[JulianS]

Hi Kay :)

Nope, I think you got to see that there is no gap.

So hehehehehehehehee there is no gap!!! You asked me to look for a gap but there never was one!!!!!!!

Could it be that attention just moves?

Yes. Makes sense.
I mean, it´s strange, because attention is.... is not an actual experience. I wouldn´t say it doesn´t exist, but the knowledge of "attention" is just the thing being attended to, ie, sometimes some things are highlited and others left in the "backgruond", and its dinamic and from the "back" they come to main focus, but the experience is that, those really detailed experiences and those others kind of difused.
Some things caught attention, maybe thought, maybe other things. Some thoughts can say "hey look there" or some sound or colour can drive attention to it, it´s dinamic. Even if trying to keep attention in some particular point, it moves. So it just moves.

Is there a ‘you’ guiding where attention goes?

Strangelly, it kind of "feels" as if there is an I inside the head somewhere moving atention. But the AE of that someone is the same as in the thinking, bunch of sensations + image of a head or a body. It is such an undefined impression that is really suspicious.

Not everything is story.
It looks like it could be until you look a little closer.
Sound "tweet" isn't story, but story can say that a blue bird down the street made that sound.
Taste labelled as "sweet" isn't a story, but story can be, "I love chocolate."
Colours/image labelled as “sunset” isn't story, but thought could say, "Wow! What a spectacular sunset!"
Now, if image labelled "sunset," isn't experience as you presently find it to be, then it IS story.
See the difference?

Yes!!! Of course, there is a lot happening, not needing for a story. I mean, all these colours in the table right now, this sound, maybe some labels too. This sense impressions, colours sounds, are evident, they exist, they kind of have the seal of "indoubdtely here" hehehehhe.
The world of "things", ie, a stable thing that existed, have functions properties and exist now and will exist, and causes and effects and past and future and correlations that´s thought-made, that´s story.

However, do you need a thought to tell you when sound or colour or taste or smell or sensation or thought have appeared?

No!!!! Everything gets automatically and effortlessly aknowledged, even stories.

What is the forehead in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image (of a forehead), right?

Yes, bunch of sensations, ie, not a defined and unchanging sensation, find a lot of sensations there, changing. Mental image also changing.

So, can a thought come from a sensation?

Nope.

Can a thought come from a mental image?

Nope.

Have a very deep look here... the forehead is one of the 'residence' of the SENSE of self. Or rather say, the sensation that is labelled as forehead is believed to be one of the location of the sense of self.

Yes. It is believed that way here too.

Sometimes, when looking carefully, when sitting and really looking, what happened (and only sometimes) was that this sensations, this "residence" moved back and back till a point in the nape. That point is a sensation labelled "unsatisfactoriness", kind of allways trated that sensation as a thing to get rid of, also like there were something special to it, but there is just a fckng sensation.

There is the... believe... like if all my life believed that there was something special about these head sensations, like.... they are more related to "me" than the foot sensation.

So in everyday life thought or maybe voice, can say like "look at me", referring to someplace in the head.
Trying to find that place just find sensations.....


PS: is it necesary report to you if I will take day and a half or two to answer, as I´ve been doing??


Big Hug :)
Julian

[forgetmenot]

Hello J U L I A N!

Nope, I think you got to see that there is no gap.

So hehehehehehehehee there is no gap!!! You asked me to look for a gap but there never was one!!!!!!!

I can be tricky sometimes ;) :D

Could it be that attention just moves?

Yes. Makes sense.
I mean, it´s strange, because attention is.... is not an actual experience. I wouldn´t say it doesn´t exist, but the knowledge of "attention" is just the thing being attended to, ie, sometimes some things are highlited and others left in the "backgruond", and its dinamic and from the "back" they come to main focus, but the experience is that, those really detailed experiences and those others kind of difused.

Let’s use the analogy of a TV screen. Does the TV screen need to pay particular attention to anything that appears on it? Can anything that appears on the screen ever be unknown, even the idea of ‘focus/attention’? Does the TV screen become ‘focus/attention’ or it is aware of the concept of ‘focus/attention’ as it appears on the screen? Does the screen ever change?

Is there really such a thing as attention and focus? Or is experience always exactly as it is. What is it exactly that tells a story about "now this is in attention/focus and that is out of attention/focus"?

Is there a ‘you’ guiding where attention goes?

Strangelly, it kind of "feels" as if there is an I inside the head somewhere moving atention. But the AE of that someone is the same as in the thinking, bunch of sensations + image of a head or a body. It is such an undefined impression that is really suspicious.

Is this “feeling” an actual sensation? If not then what is this “feeling” really….an idea, a thought?

Have a very deep look here... the forehead is one of the 'residence' of the SENSE of self. Or rather say, the sensation that is labelled as forehead is believed to be one of the location of the sense of self.

Yes. It is believed that way here too.
Sometimes, when looking carefully, when sitting and really looking, what happened (and only sometimes) was that this sensations, this "residence" moved back and back till a point in the nape. That point is a sensation labelled "unsatisfactoriness", kind of allways trated that sensation as a thing to get rid of, also like there were something special to it, but there is just a fckng sensation.
There is the... believe... like if all my life believed that there was something special about these head sensations, like.... they are more related to "me" than the foot sensation.

Compare the sensation of the soles of the feet – which is just neutral sensation – and the sensation in the forehead (labelled ‘unsatisfactoriness’ or ‘me’ or whatever) …what is the difference between them? A little bit more intense maybe, but apart from that – any difference?

PS: is it necesary report to you if I will take day and a half or two to answer, as I´ve been doing??

No, only if it is going to be longer than 3 days.

So let’s have a look at the idea of control, choice/decisions. This may also help you with the idea that you can focus or not focus (pay attention) on something!

1. Hold a hand in front of you; palm turned down.
2. Now turn the palm up. And down...and up and so on.
Watch like a hawk.

Don't go to thoughts, examine the actual experience. Do this as many times as you like, and each time inquire…

How is the movement controlled?
Does a thought control it?
Can a ‘controller’ of any description be located?
How is the decision made to turn the hand over? Track any decision point when a thought MADE THE DECISION to turn the hand over and the hand turns over immediately.
Can you find a separate individual or anything that is choosing when to turn the palm up or down?

Love, Kay

[JulianS]

Hi Kay!!!!!!!

Good evening :)

It has been amazing doing the excercise.

So, lets get the questions.

Is there really such a thing as attention and focus?Or is experience always exactly as it is.

Nope. Experience is just as it is, colour, sound, taste, sensation, thought. Where does attention appears here? Nowhere. Just when thought talks about attention when thinking about what is happening.

What is it exactly that tells a story about "now this is in attention/focus and that is out of attention/focus"?

It is a thought talking about what is happening.
There is no way to find attention other than in thought content.

Is this “feeling” an actual sensation? If not then what is this “feeling” really….an idea, a thought?

Actually, found that the idea component is much more crucial to the impression than the head sensations.
It´s more an idea that.... there is someone in here, "it must be", and an image, a blurred and changing image of a head. In attention matter, it sometimes the idea that there is something that is linking all the received impressions to some-place in the head. Just like the picture. Sometimes it´s literally a mental image of a "line" that goes from the head to an object. Sometimes is like the thought that althought I can´t see it, there is something "back" from the "eyes" <----- eyes that also can´t be seen nor comproved to exist in any way in AE.

Compare the sensation of the soles of the feet – which is just neutral sensation – and the sensation in the forehead (labelled ‘unsatisfactoriness’ or ‘me’ or whatever) …what is the difference between them? A little bit more intense maybe, but apart from that – any difference?

There is no difference in the kind of experience. Sometimes head sensations are more intense, some times the other way round. When watching, thought sometimes coments "this sensation has to mean something", but that is thought experience, a story. AE is just a sensation.


Ok, so the hand excecise.

It has been really curious, some unexpected findings...

How is the movement controlled?

Not a single clue.
Don´t know. Just happens.

Does a thought control it?

Definitely no.
OMG what complicate it would be if in order to any action to happen a thought were needed.
Crazyness.

No, thought and action were proved to be different appearances. Don´t touch each other so to speak.
AE of action is actually a change in colour and sensation, and thought "hand moving".

Can a ‘controller’ of any description be located?

There is no controller to be located.

Thought can talk about a "brain" coordinating movement, but there is no actual experience of such thing. However you instructed to see AE and not thougt, just comenting this.

How is the decision made to turn the hand over? Track any decision point when a thought MADE THE DECISION to turn the hand over and the hand turns over immediately.

Don´t know if didn´t look hard enough or if you are cheating me again hehehehhee-

There is no one point that can be called "decision point", so, im attending to the whole proces and hand just moves. Thought is not moving it, it´s not making the decision, and the hand is not turning imediately after a thought - when that happened it was just casuality. Thought coments, hand moves<------ different kind of experiences, one does not cause the other. Sometimes thought actually comes later and says "Wow, hand just moved"
I allready said, they do not touch eachothers ways.
So, it has been amazing watching this on everyday activities today, and as I allready said, what a mess would be if thought had to made every decision to move the body!!! That is so no experienced. It is simply not like that how it happens.

So with this one it was crucial to not follow what thought is saying because it goes like "okay but you are doing the excercise so somehow the reading of this actually affect what happens". So the AE answer is what i writted above.

Can you find a separate individual or anything that is choosing when to turn the palm up or down?

No. Can´t even find the "choosing". Heeeheheh



So, having fun here

:) Thank you a lot for your time Kay :)


Big hug.
Julian

[forgetmenot]

Helloooooooooooooooo Julian,

I had a smile on my face while reading your post and had a good chuckle as well…I can read how much fun you are having with the exercises! Excellent LOOKING!

Is this “feeling” an actual sensation? If not then what is this “feeling” really….an idea, a thought?

If it is an actual sensation then it is AE of sensation. If, however there is no actual sensation then a ‘feeling’ is only an idea…a thought.

Actually, found that the idea component is much more crucial to the impression than the head sensations.

Yep, without thought, is a head actually known?

It´s more an idea that.... there is someone in here, "it must be", and an image, a blurred and changing image of a head. In attention matter, it sometimes the idea that there is something that is linking all the received impressions to some-place in the head.

Yes, the sensation and the thoughts about the sensation is what gives the idea that the “I” must be there. If when you really focus on a problem, for example, and just notice how the focus seems to be around the head area….it gives the idea that there is a thinker that is thinking in the head! If that were the case, you should be able to describe the inside of the head to me with precise detail! :)

Just like the picture. Sometimes it´s literally a mental image of a "line" that goes from the head to an object. Sometimes is like the thought that althought I can´t see it, there is something "back" from the "eyes" <----- eyes that also can´t be seen nor comproved to exist in any way in AE.

Look at whatever is in front of you. It is seen from the perspective of two windows (eyes) or is it like a windscreen view? Now zoom back in and try to find the thing that’s seeing. Is there seeing separate from what’s seen, or is there just what’s seen?
Is there any awareness separate from experience or is there just experience?

It is believed that both the 'visual sight' and 'mental images' are coming from the eyes, because when it's investigated the attention automatically goes to the sensation 'of the eyes', and at the same time the image 'of the eyes' appear with it.

So another SENSE of self is linked to the sensation 'of the eyes'.

What are the eyes in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image, right?

Can sight come from a sensation?
Can sight come from an image (of the eyes)?

Can a 'mental image' come from a sensation?
Can a 'mental image' come from another mental image (of the eyes)?

Compare the sensation of the soles of the feet – which is just neutral sensation – and the sensation in the forehead (labelled ‘unsatisfactoriness’ or ‘me’ or whatever)

There is no difference in the kind of experience. Sometimes head sensations are more intense, some times the other way round. When watching, thought sometimes coments "this sensation has to mean something", but that is thought experience, a story. AE is just a sensation.

A sensation is a sensation, it is only the content of thought that differs about what the sensation is and where it is located!

How is the movement controlled?

Not a single clue.
Don´t know. Just happens.

Yep! Nice :)

Does a thought control it?

Definitely no.
OMG what complicate it would be if in order to any action to happen a thought were needed.Crazyness.

Haha, yes! Can you imagine if you needed a thought for every action needed to drive a car!?

So with this one it was crucial to not follow what thought is saying because it goes like "okay but you are doing the excercise so somehow the reading of this actually affect what happens". So the AE answer is what i writted above.

Nice observation, Julian. Have you noticed that thoughts about doing something appear, but the doing has not happened then! That the thought about the doing doesn’t get done at all, or it gets done later on, or the next day etc? The label given is ‘procrastination’ or ‘laziness’! (haha)

Can you find a separate individual or anything that is choosing when to turn the palm up or down?

No. Can´t even find the "choosing". Heeeheheh

Terrific!

Love, Kay

[JulianS]

Hi Kay :) :)

Yep, without thought, is a head actually known?

No. There are sensations and an image of a head, ie a thought.

Look at whatever is in front of you. It is seen from the perspective of two windows (eyes) or is it like a windscreen view?

So, I only see with one eye. There are no windows, or window. There are just the colours arround, wide open. Windscreen view.

Now zoom back in and try to find the thing that’s seeing.

Can´t do it. Would love to say that I find a void or that I find nothing, but actually I can´t even look back Kay....
So, two options, or there isn´t any fckng thing "back" wich sounds pretty strange and incomprensible, or I am not looking the right way.
When I say can´t look, it´s meaning two things, it can be that a thought overimposes over the explorations and "imagine" looking backwards, what is actually known that case, is this freaking thought that can be verbal "now look back" or an image (pretty undescribable), had this trouble when crossed Douglas Harding years ago so send him fly. Or it can happen that I actually find the seen, and really intend to look back and keep finding only the seen.

Is there seeing separate from what’s seen, or is there just what’s seen?

So, I don´t find any seeing separate from what´s seen. Nor experience seeing going "out" from "in here" to "out there".

Is there any awareness separate from experience or is there just experience?

Hmm..... So. Let´s take seeing.
What I can find is the colours. Colours are the awareness of those colours, even when "eyes closed" that blackness. So no doubt that in order for color to be, there is awareness of the colour. Can´t find any colour wich I am not aware of, and can´t find awaraness of colour without colour. So in the colour experience the colour is the awareness and the colour, I can´t separate them, I mean, the same thing, just colour. Call it whatever. So guess just experience.

Don´t know if I got the point here...

What are the eyes in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image, right?

Right.

Can sight come from a sensation?

Nope.

Can sight come from an image (of the eyes)?

Nope.

Can a 'mental image' come from a sensation?

No.

Can a 'mental image' come from another mental image (of the eyes)?

Would say no, but actually don´t understand this question. What is the first mental image??

it is only the content of thought that differs about what the sensation is and where it is located!

So, no thought no location right??

That the thought about the doing doesn’t get done at all, or it gets done later on, or the next day etc? The label given is ‘procrastination’ or ‘laziness’! (

Hehehehe Curious thing. Everyday there are these thoughts that arrise spontaneously like "do this" or "do that", and after some of them, the action takes place, while others just pass away, ie, they all pass away anyway. So, that doesn´t make the thought being the chooser or initiatior of actions, they are just appearances all way. Can´t know what is different in both cases, I mean, don´t have acces to the "choosing point", some thoughts just pass and others appear and pass but the action they were talking about gets done. Don´t know how or why that happens. Also a loooot of actions that thought isn´t even talking about.



So....
Big hug Kay :)

[forgetmenot]

Hey Julian,

Now zoom back in and try to find the thing that’s seeing.

Can´t do it. Would love to say that I find a void or that I find nothing, but actually I can´t even look back Kay....

LOL exactly!

So, two options, or there isn´t any fckng thing "back" wich sounds pretty strange and incomprensible, or I am not looking the right way.

What exactly is the ‘back’? The back of what exactly? The head? Back of the eyes? Where would the back of non-existent eyes be and what would it look like?

Is there seeing separate from what’s seen, or is there just what’s seen?

So, I don´t find any seeing separate from what´s seen. Nor experience seeing going "out" from "in here" to "out there".

Lovely…yes, there is only the seeingseen (no division).

Is there any awareness separate from experience or is there just experience?

What I can find is the colours. Colours are the awareness of those colours, even when "eyes closed" that blackness. So no doubt that in order for color to be, there is awareness of the colour. Can´t find any colour wich I am not aware of, and can´t find awaraness of colour without colour. So in the colour experience the colour is the awareness and the colour, I can´t separate them, I mean, the same thing, just colour. Call it whatever. So guess just experience.

Beautiful! Seeing and knowing are one and the same. Seeing of colour and seeing of seeing are one and the same = colour

Can a 'mental image' come from another mental image (of the eyes)?

Would say no, but actually don´t understand this question. What is the first mental image??

It’s like the imprint of the body when the eyes are closed. This is the same thing but the imprint being eyes. Can a mental image come from the mental image of eyes?

it is only the content of thought that differs about what the sensation is and where it is located!

So, no thought no location right??

Right!

The aim of the following exercise is to discover whether the function of choice can really be found or confirmed in actual experience. The idea of making ‘choices‘ is a very clear example of a function that we wrongly identify as the basis of our identity.

Here's what’s needed - A chair, a table and two different drinks. Any two drinks you like are okay for this: coffee, tea, milk, water, juices, smoothies, beer, wine, etc.

Preparation - Place the two drinks side by side on the table in front of you, sit comfortably on the chair and mentally label them as drink A and drink B.

Experiment - Finding the function of choice

Sit for a few moments, take a few relaxed breaths and let the dust settle. When you feel ready:

1. Look at drink A and at drink B. Think about their respective qualities, the things you like about them, compare and weigh the pros and cons of each. See if a preference is manifesting for one or the other.
2. Count to 5.
3. Choose one of the drinks. Pick it up and take a sip.

Questions:
Remember that we’re looking for some kind of function, a something, an ‘I’ which is doing the ‘choosing’.

In step 1 when thinking about their respective qualities, did you ‘choose’ the qualities? Or did they kind of appear by themselves? If some preferences manifested, did you ‘choose’ these preferences? Or did they just pop up by themselves?

In step 2 when you counted to 5, if the preferences took the back seat while the numbers took the front seat, did you ‘choose’ this sequence of event? Did you ‘choose’ to shut down the preferences to give way to the counting? Did you directly experience a mental function or faculty doing the ‘choosing’? Have you seen this function in action?

In step 3 where you made a choice, did you actually witness or directly experience a mental function or faculty doing the ‘choosing’? Did anything arise that announced, ‘I am the chooser’? If so, what does this function look like?

Sometimes we describe this sense of choosing as a ‘feeling’: It feels like ‘I’ did the ‘choosing’. But the question is, can a feeling ‘choose’? Is it in the nature of a feeling to ‘choose’?


Love, Kay

[JulianS]

Hi Kay :)

What exactly is the ‘back’? The back of what exactly? The head? Back of the eyes? Where would the back of non-existent eyes be and what would it look like?

Hmmm... Shocking.
So, I guess I was referring to the back of the eyes. But you asked and I also answered can`t find eyes other than sensations and mental image. So I checked again. I also said that don´t find a "seeing" coming from inside going to outside.
Kay, when you ask, and when I look to find answers, I can honesty say that the only AE of eyes is sensation and mental image, but that kind of doesn`t shake the assumption once and for all of "eyes" being here. Also with the inside and outside. You say without thought no location, but there is thought, so there is an aparent location dependent on thought.
What was interesting is that maybe now I get more what you were pointing to, was confirming again and again till yesterday that without thought, I wouldn`t have any clue of there being eyes or head, NOT A SINGLE EVIDENCE of eyes is found that is not thought, simply not an experience. They aren`t even visually evident, like hands for example.
So the back of non-existent eyes.... no idea. Think I read too much in the past mentioning that if you really look "back" of the sight windscreen to where the eyes suposedly are, then you will "see" something, or some abscence. So, as I said, can`t even do that.

It’s like the imprint of the body when the eyes are closed. This is the same thing but the imprint being eyes. Can a mental image come from the mental image of eyes?

No, just two appearances.



So, the excercise.

In step 1 when thinking about their respective qualities, did you ‘choose’ the qualities? Or did they kind of appear by themselves? If some preferences manifested, did you ‘choose’ these preferences? Or did they just pop up by themselves?

No, didn´t choose qualities, just looked at drinks and thinking appear.
Some preference appeared indeed after a while, kind of get sticked till the end, it just poped up, was an evident moment. Didn´t choose that.

In step 2 when you counted to 5, if the preferences took the back seat while the numbers took the front seat, did you ‘choose’ this sequence of event? Did you ‘choose’ to shut down the preferences to give way to the counting? Did you directly experience a mental function or faculty doing the ‘choosing’? Have you seen this function in action?

So, actually I counted to 5 and three times while counting thought appeared saying "take B". Didn´t choose to happen that way. Didn´t choose that preference was still there bothering. Also an image of the hand extending and taking B appeared couple of times. So that was what happened, didn´t choose to happen that way, nor any function choose it that way, even more, the "plan" was to shut up preference and just count.

In step 3 where you made a choice, did you actually witness or directly experience a mental function or faculty doing the ‘choosing’? Did anything arise that announced, ‘I am the chooser’? If so, what does this function look like?

So, didn´t experience an urrevocable "choosing moment", I was completely shure of what the "choose" was just when hand took B. The moment was just a mix of some "incomfortable" feeling and thought that should take B. Some thoughts argued and sayid "Not, don´t do what thought says" (hehehe) and a moment without previous warning, hand takes B and drinks it. When I was drinking it a thought commented "Good choice", it wasn`t a function, just an innocent thought appearing.

Sometimes we describe this sense of choosing as a ‘feeling’: It feels like ‘I’ did the ‘choosing’. But the question is, can a feeling ‘choose’? Is it in the nature of a feeling to ‘choose’?

There was this uneassiness till the image of taking B started appearing. And lots of thoughts of picking B. That feeling didn´t "choose" to take B. Feeling just exists, doesn´t choose.
Althought I`m not getting the feeling of being the chooser because didn´t experience that, at least this time.



So, reaaally enjoyed that lemonade :P Didn´t take just one sip.


Big hug,
Julian.