Me vs. Reality

[Florisness]

Similar to the “seeing” experience... there is “hearing” or more accurately the experience of sound .... the assumption that the ears are receiving... but without an active separate entity (I, ears, body) “doing” the hearing.
Again the feeling of effortlessness.

Yes these are all good observations and results!

There is an experience of sound would be more accurate.

:-)

Quick story... a friend told me he purchased 4 flotation noodles for his 4 kids to play with in their pool. His wife said that each kid was to be given their own noodle. My friend said... why? Can’t we just throw the noodles in the pool without assigning individual ownership to them? Can’t they just be noodles in a pool? The wife insisted that each kid instead claim their own noodle and write their names on them.
This lead to arguments among the children with each kid being protective of their own noodles.

That's my thinking too.

This made me laugh a bit as there is the sense that this investigation is pointing out some noodles with my name on them.

Ah good one, that's very much what it is. This whole thing is like pointing to the noodles and saying 'is this noodle really mine or yours, or is it just a noodle?'. Could the idea or labels or distinctions of I/me/my/mine and you/yours etc just all be made up with no basis in reality? Could the body not be 'yours', but just be a body? How about thoughts, are they 'your thoughts', or perhaps can we remove the distinction or label of 'yours' from even that?

I would still like receiving your reply to the other exercise when you get to it :-)

love,

[mesmer]

Sit down, relax, close your eyes. And focus on the sounds you're hearing around you. These sounds are usually called or thought of as outside of you. Now make an 'internal sound' in your mind. These sounds are usually called or thought of as inside you. Now if you go back and forth with your attention between these two sounds (the outside and inside sound), there should be a border of sorts that your attention passes if there really is such a thing as an inside or outside. Check this, go from what is called the inside sound, to the outside sound, and see if you can find a boundary or border where the inside space is left, and outside space is gone into by attention. Is such a border found? Is there a place where the inside space stops, and an outside space begins, or could it be the same space?

The thought sounds and the real sounds occur within the same space.
The initial thought sound seemed to occur within the location of the centre of my head... but could then also be imagined as a more distant sound within the space. There is no border or boundary to be found that divides where the thought sound and the real sound occur. They are occurring within the same space.

Thank you Floris.

[mesmer]

it seems that (as most people) you've blended the distinction between spirit/consciousness and the constructed persona. It would be more accurate to say that the body is inside spirit, instead of a spirit in a body.

I keep coming back to this... the body inside spirit... i don’t know this or live this or grasp this, but sense the powerful beauty of it.

[Florisness]

You're very welcome.

The thought sounds and the real sounds occur within the same space.
The initial thought sound seemed to occur within the location of the centre of my head... but could then also be imagined as a more distant sound within the space. There is no border or boundary to be found that divides where the thought sound and the real sound occur. They are occurring within the same space.

I keep coming back to this... the body inside spirit... i don’t know this or live this or grasp this, but sense the powerful beauty of it.

Could the space that you investigated be the spirit?

You say that all sounds are experienced within the same space (which are my thoughts also), would it then be accurate to say that all experience is "in" the same space, or more accurately, is the same one space?

How many people view space is from the viewpoint of being a body, which then turns what you call space into something unalive and a materialistic thing. But can you find an individual in this space, like some thing to point to and say this is a somebody/alive being/self/mesmer/etc. ? Or do you find just the 'one space'? Can you find a somebody/aware being/person/awareness that is being aware of the space, or just the 'space'?
Perhaps we could call this space better spirit/soul/consciousness, what do you think?;)

[mesmer]

Apologies Floris... a family emergency has come up. This may, temporarily affect my ability to post on a daily basis. I will try to post a response to latest questions by tomorrow. Thank you for your understanding.

[mesmer]

You say that all sounds are experienced within the same space (which are my thoughts also), would it then be accurate to say that all experience is "in" the same space, or more accurately, is the same one space?

It appears that all experience occurs in the same space. The assumption is that the experience seems separate from the space. The assumption is that the experience arises in the container of space. It appears that the experience and the space are separate. The experience appears to be an occurrence in space. To see that the experience IS the one space... difficult. This would be a leap of faith for me, as opposed to a known thing. The mind steps in and says that is hippy dippy. The experience is believed to be a thing occurring in space. Like a chair is an object in space... see no evidence to say the chair IS the space.
Need to look at this further... the perception of experience without the assumptions.

How many people view space is from the viewpoint of being a body, which then turns what you call space into something unalive and a materialistic thing. But can you find an individual in this space, like some thing to point to and say this is a somebody/alive being/self/mesmer/etc. ?

Am believing i am a body in space. That this body is the physical container of someone who is conscious/ living in space... and is not clearly seeing the truth of no self.

Or do you find just the 'one space'?

Believing there is one space with objects / experiences contained and occurring within it.

Can you find a somebody/aware being/person/awareness that is being aware of the space, or just the 'space'?

There is the assumption that there is a conscious entity, that i label “me”, that is experiencing awareness in space. There is an assumed difference between awareness as something occurring and space, the place where it occurs.

Perhaps we could call this space better spirit/soul/consciousness, what do you think?;)

I am having trouble grasping this. This would require a leap of faith. I can imagine that space may be alive spirit/soul/consciousness but am not seeing it or knowing that.

[mesmer]

I really don’t know what space actually is... the container of things? The absence of things? Air? Spirit? These all seem like possibilities... so i am in the world of theory and conjecture as opposed to knowing from direct experience.

[Florisness]

Hi mesmer,

Well inquiring into space is not necessary for getting there is no self, but as you show some interest, let us go in that direction for now.

It appears that all experience occurs in the same space. The assumption is that the experience seems separate from the space. The assumption is that the experience arises in the container of space. It appears that the experience and the space are separate. The experience appears to be an occurrence in space. To see that the experience IS the one space... difficult. This would be a leap of faith for me, as opposed to a known thing. The mind steps in and says that is hippy dippy. The experience is believed to be a thing occurring in space. Like a chair is an object in space... see no evidence to say the chair IS the space.
Need to look at this further... the perception of experience without the assumptions.

Yes this is very normal to think, that 'things' are objects occurring in space and time, I would suggest that an 'object' is just empty space, coloring itself as 'full space', or perhaps a better word for now would be 'colored space'. Look at it this way, if you look at an 'object' or 'colored space', are they really two things there? One an object, and one the space? Or can you only find one 'thing'? Look at 'empty' space, isn't this actually full? Full of space or spaciousness? If you put an "object" "in it", can you find anywhere where there isn't the presence of the space? The very object IS the space. It does seem a little hard to communicate though, so I hope you get it. Perhaps it's easier if you change the word space with experience, isn't everything you see what we could call experience? An object is experience, empty space is experience (otherwise you wouldn't even know about it, because it wouldn't be your experience). It's quite easy to get, but perhaps requires a little different way of looking at it. Don't try to just believe me, just see if you can see what I mean and that's all you got to do in this conversation. I'd also suggest that space is only experience, and there isn't space outside experience, no world outside experience. But let's not go into that now.

Am believing i am a body in space. That this body is the physical container of someone who is conscious/ living in space... and is not clearly seeing the truth of no self.

Okay let's go into this by first going into an exercise that continues on the previous ones.

How about feeling? Let's broaden what we did with seeing, and apply it to the feeling aspect. I won't go into smelling and tasting, it's the same sort of thing and you could also do it or think about it on your own if you wish.

Normally we say 'I feel a table', so, let's explore that. Put your hand on something that gives some sensations to work with, e.g. the table, close your eyes and inquire:
- can you find something which is doing the feeling? An I, a hand, a body..
- without refering or using thought, can you find something that is the object of the feeling (like a table)? Or perhaps do you just find sensations?
- what could be said about the experience, without believing thought?
- do you notice how images/thoughts are imposed onto the experience?

After doing that, is 'I feel a table' an accurate description of your experience? If not, how would you phrase it to make it as accurate as possible?

Have a nice day,

[mesmer]

The space and object relationship steers me into philosophical realms as opposed to examining direct experience.

Perhaps it's easier if you change the word space with experience, isn't everything you see what we could call experience? An object is experience, empty space is experience (otherwise you wouldn't even know about it, because it wouldn't be your experience).

Yes. This seems true. A chair as experience, space as experience. This makes it easier to see that they are the same thing. All experience.

Okay let's go into this by first going into an exercise that continues on the previous ones.

How about feeling? Let's broaden what we did with seeing, and apply it to the feeling aspect. I won't go into smelling and tasting, it's the same sort of thing and you could also do it or think about it on your own if you wish.

Normally we say 'I feel a table', so, let's explore that. Put your hand on something that gives some sensations to work with, e.g. the table, close your eyes and inquire:

can you find something which is doing the feeling? An I, a hand, a body..

There is feeling of the table... no doing.

without refering or using thought, can you find something that is the object of the feeling (like a table)? Or perhaps do you just find sensations?

There is feeling, touch sensation... am i providing this experience? Is the table / object providing this? There is just the experience of touch, feeling.

what could be said about the experience, without believing thought?

Without thought there is just the experience of touch, feeling... effortless, no doer or provider to be found.

do you notice how images/thoughts are imposed onto the experience?

Thought seeks a doer or provider and wants to label object “table” and sensations...cool, smooth etc.

After doing that, is 'I feel a table' an accurate description of your experience? If not, how would you phrase it to make it as accurate as possible?

There is an experience of touch, feeling.


Thank you for your continued guidance Floris.

[Florisness]

Thank you for your continued guidance Floris.

You're very welcome.

There is an experience of touch, feeling.

That's perfect, your answers are spot on as far as I'm concerned:-)

You wrote the following in an earlier message. Let's look at this again now.

Am believing i am a body in space. That this body is the physical container of someone who is conscious/ living in space... and is not clearly seeing the truth of no self.

Is there such a thing as a body? Perhaps a better question, do you experience a body? Perhaps you think 'of course I experience a body', look down, see some shape and say here it is. But isn't that just color/seeing?

If you close your eyes, is there any experience there which can be called body? Is what is left of the body when the eyes are closed not only sensations, or is there more? Is there any boundary found in the experience, so that there is a part of experience that is inside and outside?

So when you say 'I am body in space', are you then saying I am this cluster/combinations of sensations? So if the sensations would go, that's you that is going? Is there a particular experience findable that could be called I?

[mesmer]

Is there such a thing as a body? Perhaps a better question, do you experience a body? Perhaps you think 'of course I experience a body', look down, see some shape and say here it is. But isn't that just color/seeing?

“Color seeing” “shape seeing” would be the accurate description of the visual experience when i drop all pre-conceived notions of what a body or “my body” is.

If you close your eyes, is there any experience there which can be called body?

There is a sense of energy, aliveness that the mind houses within the shape of that colored space.

Is what is left of the body when the eyes are closed not only sensations, or is there more?

Sensations, thoughts are experienced.

Is there any boundary found in the experience, so that there is a part of experience that is inside and outside?

There is a sense of boundary... the assumption that the sensations are contained or emanating from within the body shape. No direct experience of “this is inside” and “this is outside”. The sense that there is emanation from a center / source / body that has a limited reach. Compare it to a light bulb glow.

So when you say 'I am body in space', are you then saying I am this cluster/combinations of sensations?

Yeah... is that what i am identifying as me? Does experience need an experiencer?

So if the sensations would go, that's you that is going?

That is the assumption.

Is there a particular experience findable that could be called I?

Thought combined with the sensory experience is what i am identifying as me?

Sorry for the question answers... these are the questions arising right now. Is this what me is made of?

[mesmer]

Emotions. Emotions are in the eyes closed, thought / sensation experience as well.

[Florisness]

Sorry for the question answers... these are the questions arising right now.

No worries, whatever comes up is good.

“Color seeing” “shape seeing” would be the accurate description of the visual experience when i drop all pre-conceived notions of what a body or “my body” is.

Yes good. And perhaps as you saw in the exploration of some of the senses (seeing, hearing, feeling), we couldn't determine a difference between the concept of seeing and the seen. So perhaps could we say that color = seeing?

There is a sense of energy, aliveness that the mind houses within the shape of that colored space.

I don't quite understand what you mean with the last part of that sentence "aliveness that ... colored space". What does mind mean when you say it? Btw, if you look for a mind, do you find one?

There is a sense of boundary... the assumption that the sensations are contained or emanating from within the body shape. No direct experience of “this is inside” and “this is outside”. The sense that there is emanation from a center / source / body that has a limited reach. Compare it to a light bulb glow.

Okay, understood.
When you say "there is a sense of boundary", is the sense of boundary a combination of sensations, that gets interpreted as a 'sense of boundary'? Also, can you find a boundary to your experience?
Could body shape (the experience we talk when the eyes are closed) be also described as the shape the sensations are laid out in? I think body shape is a fine word for that. just wanting to loosen the notion of there being a body a bit further.

Yeah... is that what i am identifying as me? Does experience need an experiencer?

Good questions. Yes I would say probably you've been (partly) identifying yourself as sensations. Isn't that so? If you close your eyes and feel the body/sensations, aren't you having the idea and sense that that's you? When you do that (closing eyes and feeling 'the body'), are there also a lot of thoughts coming up, giving a sense of being a solid body? Like when putting the attention on the sensations that we label head, do thoughts about a head come with that, creating the sense of 'you the looking head'? As to the last question, can you find something that is experiencing experience, or can you only find that which we call experience?

Thought combined with the sensory experience is what i am identifying as me?

That sounds good. I would say the sort of 'locking in' of certain thoughts and feelings/sensations is or creates what we call identity. What we identify with perhaps we could say are indeed sensory experiences and ideas. What do you think?

[mesmer]

Many questions to answer... need some time to respond. Thank you Floris.

[mesmer]

“Color seeing” “shape seeing” would be the accurate description of the visual experience when i drop all pre-conceived notions of what a body or “my body” is.
Yes good. And perhaps as you saw in the exploration of some of the senses (seeing, hearing, feeling), we couldn't determine a difference between the concept of seeing and the seen. So perhaps could we say that color = seeing?

Yes. This does require the shift to direct seeing, as the pre conceived notions are still pretty much the default.

There is a sense of energy, aliveness that the mind houses within the shape of that colored space.
I don't quite understand what you mean with the last part of that sentence "aliveness that ... colored space". What does mind mean when you say it? Btw, if you look for a mind, do you find one?

There is a sense of boundary... the assumption that the sensations are contained or emanating from within the “colored space” or perceived container that i refer to as my body.

When you say "there is a sense of boundary", is the sense of boundary a combination of sensations, that gets interpreted as a 'sense of boundary'?

Yeah... the sense of boundary is pretty engrained. The interpretation is that the combination of senses has a source that is body and is emanating from that body.

Also, can you find a boundary to your experience?

Not a firm boundary. More a diffuse sense of this energy/sensory/ experience emanating from the assumed source that i call “body” and it’s reach feels finite... like a lightbulb in darkness that is brightest at it’s centre and loses brightness as it emanates beyond it’s source.

Could body shape (the experience we talk when the eyes are closed) be also described as the shape the sensations are laid out in?

Yeah... there is a sense of location. A sense located or emanating from various specific parts of body. The overall experience gives the sensations a body shape from which they emanate.

body shape is a fine word for that. just wanting to loosen the notion of there being a body a bit further

Yeah... is that what i am identifying as me? Does experience need an experiencer?

Good questions. Yes I would say probably you've been (partly) identifying yourself as sensations. Isn't that so?

Sensations combined with a narrator, interpeter voice speaking in the head

If you close your eyes and feel the body/sensations, aren't you having the idea and sense that that's you?

Yes.. it is labeled MY unique experience.

When you do that (closing eyes and feeling 'the body'), are there also a lot of thoughts coming up, giving a sense of being a solid body?

The long held belief that the body is the solid container of experience.

Like when putting the attention on the sensations that we label head, do thoughts about a head come with that, creating the sense of 'you the looking head'?

Yes... head, hands, feet , chest... they all have location and attached thoughts about them.... with me ...”the looking head” ...and the seeming source of the narrative voice, being the command center.

As to the last question, can you find something that is experiencing experience, or can you only find that which we call experience?

The earlier direct looking exercises were revelatory in that there was experience with no need for the idea of a receiver of experience or a doer causing experience.

”Thought combined with the sensory experience is what i am identifying as me?”
.... That sounds good. I would say the sort of 'locking in' of certain thoughts and feelings/sensations is or creates what we call identity.

What we identify with perhaps we could say are indeed sensory experiences and ideas. What do you think?

Self Identity is attached / made up of the combo of sensory experiences, ideas and narrative thought voice in the head. Have the sense that this is an intellectual position as opposed to a known and living truth.