Looking to sort out what I've realized from what I've memorized

[Anastacia42]

Good. Yes, I understand.

I'm not sure that all this extra commentary about mental activity is helpful in relation to what you're getting at, but I see it as the reason why I answered the first three questions the way I did so it seems relevant to include.

Correct. It's not helpful, except to show where you are stuck.

So re-read Colored Socks again. We don't care about the content of thought & do not need to report or discuss it. Memory is just more content of thought. It is not your present Direct or Actual Experience.

Pay attention to & post only your present Direct or Actual Experience.

Direct or Actual Experience is

Seeing
Hearing
Feeling (Sensation, not emotion. Emotion is Sensation plus made-up thoughts & labels)
Tasting
Smelling
Thoughts Arising (but not their content)

The clearer you get, the less words you may need. You got it & you're doing great.

Let's look at how necessary (or not) all of those words are.

Stream Exercise

Imagine for a moment a scene, one of a little mountain stream which is tumbling down a hillside gully, not far from its source. It has been raining and so the level is quite high.

Consider in your mind's eye, if you can, how it flows to the right over a little rock (where, had the level been lower, it would probably have gone around the rock), then the flow goes to the left over a tree bow, and then slows a little in a broader place, before splashing over a small cascade into a pool, and so on down the mountain side.

Does it choose any of its directions? Is it even really a separate entity different from the water deposited in it, the rocks, the depressions in the ground etc? Is it even the same entity moment by moment, or more the product of weather conditions and water, like an ever-changing pattern?

1. Can you find anywhere where "Tennyson" autonomously intervenes into life, choosing something that is not the product of all the elements; that is not a part of the overall flow?

2. Now please consider a regular decision made eg; what to wear in the morning, or what to eat for lunch, and describe to me what happens. There are environmental factors, there are colour preferences (but where did those come from - any autonomous intervention there perhaps?), practical issues (such as what is available), available time for preparation, purpose (eg; need to fill up for the day, or to look hip and cool for that person!) etc.

Where in there is an autonomous entity intervening in the flow of life? Can you find someone somewhere?

3. Can anything be found for which "Tennyson" is responsible – if so responsible to what and for what?

As always, relax & have fun!

Loving,

[Soma]

Memory is just more content of thought. It is not your present Direct or Actual Experience.

I'm going to go over your message again and respond to the rest of it shortly, but I want to get clarity here too.

Why is the content of thought not my present direct or actual experience? I understand that it doesn't impact or represent it, but it's still available as something within the total experience of the moment is it not?

If I had no memory, there would be no ability for this body to navigate the terrain of life, so it seems to me that thought content is integral to experience, even if "the map is not the territory."

I guess what I'm getting at is I don't quite understand the value here in totally negating thought content.

[Soma]

Does it choose any of its directions? Is it even really a separate entity different from the water deposited in it, the rocks, the depressions in the ground etc? Is it even the same entity moment by moment, or more the product of weather conditions and water, like an ever-changing pattern?

Nothing is choosing anything, there is simply pure freedom for processes to happen in relationship to all others

1. Can you find anywhere where "Tennyson" autonomously intervenes into life, choosing something that is not the product of all the elements; that is not a part of the overall flow?

If there is, there would be no way to discern it. Everything Tennyson does is caused by influences that existed before there was the even idea of Tennyson at all.

2. Now please consider a regular decision made eg; what to wear in the morning, or what to eat for lunch, and describe to me what happens. There are environmental factors, there are colour preferences (but where did those come from - any autonomous intervention there perhaps?), practical issues (such as what is available), available time for preparation, purpose (eg; need to fill up for the day, or to look hip and cool for that person!) etc.

This morning I had the decision before me of what to eat for breakfast. The was the influence of the habit of eating in the morning which triggered the desire for food, a focus on the sensation of hunger in my stomach, memory of wanting a breakfast burrito yesterday and not choosing it, I like breakfast burritos, not much food at home, breakfast burrito coffee shop 2 blocks away, decision made, I go.

Where in there is an autonomous entity intervening in the flow of life? Can you find someone somewhere?

Everything was already present as the riverbed through which the water of Tennyson had no choice but to flow towards the decision that was made. The story of autonomy only makes sense in hindsight, falsely assuming that Tennyson created the riverbed and then went down it. The illusion is created because the water has an impact on the flow of the riverbed, as it degrades the dirt and reshapes the path. It's a strange loop of co-dependent phenomenon, neither is autonomous in relation to the other.

3. Can anything be found for which "Tennyson" is responsible – if so responsible to what and for what?

From this perspective, there's no possibility of responsibility existing. Only in a linear, separate reality is that idea able to be applied.

[Anastacia42]

Hi,

Why is the content of thought not my present direct or actual experience?

Words are not the things or experiences themselves. They're made up, fiction. The minute you name something, you're one step away from reality.

Here's a pointer that may help.

Label-Reality Correlation

There is a belief that labels have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’. But there isn’t. Just like it is a generally accepted belief that labels like ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are inherent characteristics of ‘things’. But actually, they are not.

When you look at the word label ‘GREEN' , what is the actual experience?

Is the color red ‘experienced’, or is the color green ‘experienced’ as the label suggests?

Does the label ‘GREEN’ have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’? Or does the label suggest something else other than what is here now (red colour)?

Is 'green' associated in any way with the experience of the colour red; or is green just a label that overlays the actual experience of red?

If the label ‘GREEN’ is replaced with the label ‘GOOD’ or ‘BAD’ , is the redness affected in any way as the labels suggests?

Does redness become ‘good’ or ‘bad’, or do the labels have no affect whatsoever on ‘reality’?

Let me know what is SEEN.

Memories are made up in more ways than you realize. We don't store exact memories, only clues. They're pieced back together layer - usually wrong. That's how police get 10 different eye witness accounts at accident scenes. I have a pointer for that we may do later.

If I had no memory, there would be no ability for this body to navigate the terrain of life,

Yes, you're doing this already., but telling a story of "me doing."

I'll keep giving you pointers to help you see this.

Loving,

[Soma]

Words are not the things or experiences themselves. They're made up, fiction. The minute you name something, you're one step away from reality.

I completely recognize the truth of this. I also see that there is a direct experience of a word suggesting a fiction. I can see that the map of words I create to represent the territory of life, is not the territory it describes.

I also see that the territory is so completely all-encompassing that it includes the map. I cannot "throw out" the map simply for being fictitious, or I would be dividing it from the territory as if the fact of it being a fiction made it somehow a separate, outside system. I have a direct experience of this map, as a map.

It is seen integral as an outgrowth which arises from the territory through the medium of this body, regardless of how the memories are pieced together. I am not stepping away from reality when I use the map, because it is made out of reality. I experience a sense of dissonance if I attempt to react to reality as if it were the map, because that's delusional.

The reality that the labels suggest literally, does not exist. But labels exist, not as labels, but as the ultimately un-namable thing/experience that they are, which could loosely be described as a memory-mapping/recall function of the brain.

Now that I get into this it seems to me that by naming something I have paradoxically come closer to its reality by producing a totally creative and technically unnecessary, abstract relational connection with it. Unnecessary, relational creativity is pure art.

I'll keep giving you pointers to help you see this.

Sounds good, thank you for your time and I hope you've had an enjoyable weekend!

[Anastacia42]

Hi,

You cannot *think* your way through this. Please stop. I'm not here to discuss, only to point.

Thinking, for our purposes, us the problem not the solution.

The weekend was fine. I hope yours was, too

Much love,

[Anastacia42]

Hi,

Please do the Red/ Green pointer.

LU has guided thousands of people to see there's is no self. You're no different. This pointing & ignoring content of thought not only works, but is based in truth.

How many people have you helped to SEE? If none, perhaps you can trust our experience here.

Much love,

[Soma]

Oops, I thought you were just referencing the green/red pointer in your previous message as we had already done it prior to that.

When you look at the word label ‘GREEN' , what is the actual experience?

The actual experience is of red.

Is the color red ‘experienced’, or is the color green ‘experienced’ as the label suggests?

It's obviously only red.

Does the label ‘GREEN’ have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’? Or does the label suggest something else other than what is here now (red colour)?

2. The label suggests a color that is not present.

Is 'green' associated in any way with the experience of the color red; or is green just a label that overlays the actual experience of red?

It is not associated, it doesn't even overlay the experience of red, there is no experience of green nor is there even the suggestion of green, unless I include my meaning making overlay in the perception of the label.

If the label ‘GREEN’ is replaced with the label ‘GOOD’ or ‘BAD’ , is the redness affected in any way as the labels suggests?

No

Does redness become ‘good’ or ‘bad’, or do the labels have no affect whatsoever on ‘reality’?

It does not

I see that labels do have an effect on reality, I watch them do it. A line or sound is transformed into a specific shape, and the shape is given to a human, and they respond to it. Is that not an effect? A label has a specific geometry, whether sound or visual or mental, and that geometry has an effect the same way the geometry of certain waves have the effect of telling my eyes to see red.

I'm not trying to discuss, but this is what I see from the pointer, what else am I to do?

[Soma]

When you say "see" are you referring to the visual sense gate alone? If so, I rescind the last bit of what I put on the last answer.

[Anastacia42]

Hi,

I see that labels do have an effect on reality, I watch them do it. A line or sound is transformed into a specific shape, and the shape is given to a human, and they respond to it. Is that not an effect? A label has a specific geometry, whether sound or visual or mental, and that geometry has an effect the same way the geometry of certain waves have the effect of telling my eyes to see red.

Please stop thinking & analyzing. i will not read or respond to thinking. It will not help. In fact, it's a distraction.

JUST LOOK.

When you say "see" are you referring to the visual sense gate alone? If so, I rescind the last bit of what I put on the last answer.

Of course. Re- read Colored Socks. That's the instruction here.

This is how to LOOK for no self in the exercises - we call them "pointers' - that we will be doing here:

Colored Socks

There is a big difference between knowing that there is nothing to give up and seeing that there is nothing to give up.

Here is an example to illustrate the difference:

If I ask you what color socks you are wearing right now you have two ways to come up with an answer:

• You can think about it, you can think back to this morning and try to remember putting your socks on, and you can probably tell me what color you think they are.

• Alternatively, you can take a quick look at your socks and tell me what color they actually are!

Hopefully you would agree that you can only be 100% certain by looking.

For the purpose of seeing this "no self" idea, it is very important that you are clear about this difference.

Knowing is about knowledge which is all in the mind and we are not interested in that

We are only interested in looking at and seeing what is actually going on in your present moment-to-moment experience. We are only interested in your Direct Experience in the moment..

Direct or Actual Experience is

Seeing
Hearing
Feeling (Sensation, not emotion. Emotion is Sensation plus made-up thoughts & labels)
Tasting
Smelling
Thoughts Arising (but not their content)

Please let me know if you are clear about this or if you would like any further clarification.




Keep this SIMPLE & obvious.

What are you rescinding, then?

[Anastacia42]

Labels have no effect on reality.

They change it in no way whatsoever.

[Soma]

Of course. Re- read Colored Socks. That's the instruction here.

I reread it, the instruction is ambiguous. It simply asks to take note of the experience. In light of it being exclusively in reference what is seen in the experience of sight, I wouldn't include that I see labels as effecting the reality.

Please let me know if you are clear about this or if you would like any further clarification.

This is clear.

[Anastacia42]

Hi Tennyson,

I no longer want to guide you. I'm not the best guide for this.

I can let other guides know that someone else needs to take over. Shall I do that?

Thank you,

[Soma]

Sure Stacy, thank you for your time.

[Anastacia42]

Will do.

You're welcome.