dispelling the illusion of a separate self

[poppyseed]

Hi Mick
Very good! Let’s LOOK even further…

The cold appears in this open space of consciousness.

Is consciousness a container for sensations (experiences)? Are there ”solid” sensations floating around in “consciousness”- “ appearing and disappearing”? Is the knowing/being aware of/being conscious of sensations separate from the sensations? Is there a visible border? Where does consciousness stop and the sensations start? Is there an entity called consciousness? What does it look like? Does it speak etc – how can you describe it using the five senses? Are there sensations without awareness/consciousness? Now, would consciousness/awareness of the sensations exist without the sensations? Please LOOK, don’t intellectualise, imagine or remember from teachings! What is there when you look for "consciousness"?
Love
Rali

[Mick]

Hi Rali,

Alright!

Is consciousness a container for sensations (experiences)?

When I look, all there is are sensations, colors, sounds, smells, tastes and thoughts. There is no direct experience of consciousness or of something containing these raw sensations. The experience of a space in which sensations manifest is a thought derived from raw sensations. There is nothing in direct experience beyond (raw) sensations.

Are there ”solid” sensations floating around in “consciousness”- “ appearing and disappearing”?

No, sensations, colors, sounds, smells, tastes and thoughts are always ‘in motion’, they are not fixed or solid entities but constantly evolving, mutating, never the same for more than a fraction of a second. There is no way to ‘freeze’ these raw sensations. It’s a film, not pictures replacing pictures (appearing and disappearing).

Is the knowing/being aware of/being conscious of sensations separate from the sensations?

No, there are only these raw sensations in direct experience. The being aware of sensations is itself a raw sensation – a thought and/or a sensation. There is nothing in experience beyond raw sensations.

Is there a visible border? Where does consciousness stop and the sensations start?

There is no border, no separation between consciousness and sensations. ‘Consciousness’ is a thought, which is a raw sensation.

Is there an entity called consciousness? What does it look like? Does it speak etc – how can you describe it using the five senses?

In direct experience there is no entity called consciousness. There are only thoughts and sensations. Consciousness is a thought – something we intellectually suppose is the ground for the raw sensations we experience. It is not an experience itself.

Are there sensations without awareness/consciousness?

No, when there is direct experience of a sensation there is awareness of that sensation. But this statement is not derived from direct experience. It is a thought. I don’t know how to answer this question from direct experience.

Now, would consciousness/awareness of the sensations exist without the sensations?

No, without the direct experience of raw sensations there is no awareness, since awareness can only be of raw sensations: thoughts, sensations, sounds, … The experience of a ‘featureless open space or container’ is a sensation – so in direct experience nothing exists beyond the sensations.

Please LOOK, don’t intellectualise, imagine or remember from teachings! What is there when you look for "consciousness"?

When I look for consciousness, there is nothing.

Much love,

Michael

Ps. I have been noting direct experience throughout the last days, labeling it ‘thought, sensation, sound, color, … I think it’s helpful.

[poppyseed]

Hi Mick

When I look for consciousness, there is nothing.

When I look, all there is are sensations, colors, sounds, smells, tastes and thoughts. There is no direct experience of consciousness or of something containing these raw sensations.

Very good!

No, when there is direct experience of a sensation there is awareness of that sensation. But this statement is not derived from direct experience. It is a thought. I don’t know how to answer this question from direct experience.

Well, there is aware/knowing aspect of that raw sensation. There is a noticing/noting/knowing/being aware of that sensation, which hopefully you can see. But are the senses and the knowing of them separate or it’s all one inseparable knowing(aware)_hearing_seeing_thinking_smelling_tasting_sensing (THIS)?
Please watch this video, it might bring a bit more clarity on what I'm pointing to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Lm3G0_4YKU&t=10s

Now, focus on the feeling of am-ness/being, aliveness.
Can you tell if there is a being or just being?
Is life happening to a being or as being?
Is there an owner of being?

Ps. I have been noting direct experience throughout the last days, labeling it ‘thought, sensation, sound, color, … I think it’s helpful.

Very good! The shift in perception is happening :)
Love
Rali

[Mick]

Hi Rali,

Well, there is aware/knowing aspect of that raw sensation. There is a noticing/noting/knowing/being aware of that sensation, which hopefully you can see.

Indeed, there is the experience of the raw sensation and in that experience is an element of knowing. In the experience of a sound, there is the knowing / being aware of the sound.

But are the senses and the knowing of them separate or it’s all one inseparable knowing(aware)_hearing_seeing_thinking_smelling_tasting_sensing (THIS)?

The direct experience of hearing, seeing, thinking, smelling, tasting and sensing something is inseparable from the knowing / being aware of what is heard, seen, thought, smelled, tasted and sensed. There can be no direct experience of something without the knowing or the awareness of that something (sound, colors, thought, smell, taste, sensation). In other words, we can’t have the direct sensory experience of colors or sounds without being aware of these colors or sounds.

Now, focus on the feeling of am-ness/being, aliveness.
Can you tell if there is a being or just being?

In direct experience there are only thoughts, sensations, colors, sounds, smells and tastes. There is a constant stream of these raw sensations. This, I take it, is (the experience of) being / aliveness.
The notion of being a (separate) being is (the content of) a thought, not something given in direct experience. It is not experienced in the arising of sensations, sounds, plays of colors, smells, tastes and thoughts. Only being is experienced in this stream of raw sensations, not being a separate being.
So, there is just being, not a being.

Is life happening to a being or as being?

Life is happening as a stream of raw sensations. The being / aliveness is in the experience of these sensations. So, life is happening as being.
To say that life is happening to a being, to ‘me’, entails that there is a separate ‘I’. But the label ‘I’ is (the product of) a thought. So, saying that life happens to ‘me’ amounts to saying that life happens to (the content of) a thought. That is absurd and obviously false. Thoughts happen in life – they are part of the constant stream of raw sensations – but life, this stream of raw sensations, does not happen to some of these sensations (namely self-referential thoughts and feelings).

Is there an owner of being?

There is no owner of the stream of raw sensations. Very clearly, they are not produced, directed or controlled by a separate entity. They manifest on their own accord. They are also not witnessed by a separate entity. The witnessing is in the experience. It is not separate from the experience (as mentioned above).
So, there is no owner of being – no separate mental entity that can produce, discard, retain or even witness – the stream of raw sensations that constitute being. The experience of life (or being) is nothing but a constant stream of raw sensations and no one or nothing can lay claim to these.

Much love,

Michael

[poppyseed]

Hi Mick
Ver very good!!!
I really like this:

There is no owner of the stream of raw sensations. Very clearly, they are not produced, directed or controlled by a separate entity. They manifest on their own accord. They are also not witnessed by a separate entity. The witnessing is in the experience. It is not separate from the experience (as mentioned above).

How does that make you feel?

I know that we’ve been through sensations but let’s just do that anyway…
Sit comfortably on a chair. Close your eyes and relax. Pay attention only to the feeling of your body. Just notice the pure sensations, without relying on thoughts or mental images. Keep your eyes closed and look:
Can it be known how tall the body is?
Does the body have a weight or volume?
In the actual experience does the body have a shape or a form?
Is there a boundary between the body and the chair? At the point where your body contacts the chair, are there two things there, a body and chair, or one, sensation?
Is it "my" body, or is it just a body?
What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to? What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?
Can the 'body' do things?

Look very carefully, especially with the last question. You can look several times during the day while doing other things (like washing hands, showering, walking, lying down, etc) before replying.

Love
Rali

[Mick]

Thanks, Rali!

How does that make you feel (that there is no owner of the stream of raw sensations / no instigator, controller, or witnesser)?

Curious about how it unfolds, about what’s next. There’s also a sense of wonder that life is experienced at all (rather than there being no experience of it). That life (in certain forms) experiences itself.

Sit comfortably on a chair. Close your eyes and relax. Pay attention only to the feeling of your body. Just notice the pure sensations, without relying on thoughts or mental images. Keep your eyes closed and look:
Can it be known how tall the body is?

No, the body is felt as vibrations, pressure, cold/heat, tingling sensations, etc. Without mapping these sensations onto a mental image of the body, there is no knowing of the shape of the body, its size or even that the head is above the shoulders and the knees above the feet. Sensations in different body parts are felt, that’s all.

Does the body have a weight or volume?

No, there are sensations of pressure where the body is in contact with the chair, but inferring that the body has a weight is a thought, it is not given in the direct experience of the sensation of pressure.
As pointed out before, there is no knowing from the raw sensations what shape the body has. This is only done by mapping these sensations on a mental image of the body. So, from the sensations, we can’t infer the body has volume. (That being said, it is very hard not to map sensations on some representation of the body).

In the actual experience does the body have a shape or a form?

No, see answers above.

Is there a boundary between the body and the chair? At the point where your body contacts the chair, are there two things there, a body and chair, or one, sensation?

At the point where the body is in contact with the chair there is only realm of sensations (pressure, tingling, heat, etc.). There is no clear boundary.

Is it "my" body, or is it just a body?

When only relying on the raw sensations, there is no experience of a body, just the experience of vibrations, tingling, pressure, heat/cold, etc. Inferring ‘a body’ from these sensations requires a thought (which comes very naturally).
Saying it is ‘my body’ requires a further thought or feeling (which also comes very naturally) that there is an ‘I’ that controls the body. This thought is mistaken since the body is moved / controlled by thoughts and other processes over which no one has any control. It is not controlled by a separate entity.

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to? What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

The actual experience of the body is:
Physical sensations – vibration, pressure, heat/cold, tingling, tactile sensations when touching part of the body with other part etc.
Colors (when looking down on it)
Sounds (made by the body)
Smells and tastes

The label ‘body’ refers to all of this sensory input. It also refers to the sensory input we gather from what we consider to be the bodies of other people (colors, tactile sensations, sounds, smells and tastes).

Can the 'body' do things?

Yes. It digests food, pumps the heart, produces sensory impressions, thoughts, and of course it moves. It is not commanded and controlled by a separate mental entity, rather it acts on its own accord. Life is happening through organisms or bodies (plant, animal and human bodies).

Much love,

Mick

[poppyseed]

Hi Mick

Sensations in different body parts are felt, that’s all.

Are sensations contained in the body? How is this observed in DE? LOOK! Is there a location for sensations or the location is a label? How is the sensation “hand” different from the sensation “leg” without thought?
Exercise:
1. Sit comfortably on a chair. Close your eyes. Lift your leg and pay attention to the sensation of “leg lifted”
2. Open your eyes and now pay attention to the sight of the leg only.
3. While looking at the leg, pay attention to the sensation of the leg.
Do sight and sensation appear simultaneously? Do they appear separately? Do they depend on each other? Is there a link between them?

Saying it is ‘my body’ requires a further thought or feeling (which also comes very naturally) that there is an ‘I’ that controls the body. This thought is mistaken since the body is moved / controlled by thoughts and other processes over which no one has any control. It is not controlled by a separate entity.

Yes! Now, can a thought do anything? Can a thought see, touch, hear ... ? Can the thought "I move my hand" move the hands?
What makes sensations labelled “body” happen?
Look at the clouds in the sky. Are they moving according to anyone's direction?
How is the movement of hands different from the movement of clouds?

Can the 'body' do things?

Yes. It digests food, pumps the heart, produces sensory impressions, thoughts, and of course it moves. It is not commanded and controlled by a separate mental entity, rather it acts on its own accord. Life is happening through organisms or bodies (plant, animal and human bodies).

Can a sensation do anything? Can a sense see, touch, hear ... ? How is the “pumping of the heart” observed in DE without thought content? Do you see another sensation labelled “body” making it happen? Remember the coloured socks exercise? Don’t think and try to remember from knowledge, LOOK!

Love
Rali

[Mick]

Thanks Rali,

This is really helpful. I was slipping into formulating answers based on thinking and not on direct experience. So, back to looking.

Are sensations contained in the body? How is this observed in DE? LOOK! Is there a location for sensations or the location is a label?

Sensations are not contained or experienced in the body. They are just experienced, as are sounds, colors, etc. Locating them on the body is done by thinking / mapping them on a mental image – much in the same way that locating the sound of something playing on the television as coming from the television is done by thought. It is not directly experienced, only the sound is.
So the location of sensations is a label / thought.

How is the sensation “hand” different from the sensation “leg” without thought?

From direct experience, the sensations labeled as coming from a ‘hand’ are not different from the sensations labeled as coming from a ‘leg’. Both consist of an ever-changing stream of sensations of vibration, heat/cold, tingling, etc.

Exercise:
1. Sit comfortably on a chair. Close your eyes. Lift your leg and pay attention to the sensation of “leg lifted”
2. Open your eyes and now pay attention to the sight of the leg only.
3. While looking at the leg, pay attention to the sensation of the leg.
Do sight and sensation appear simultaneously? Do they appear separately? Do they depend on each other? Is there a link between them?

Sight and sensation appear simultaneously, not separately. They don’t depend on each other – it’s just shades of color and vibration and a slightly burning sensation appearing. There is absolutely no link between them from direct experience. The only way to link the sensations with the sight is by thought – I’m lifting my leg that is why there is this particular sight and these particular sensations.

Now, can a thought do anything? Can the thought "I move my hand" move the hands?

This is great and produces a slight ‘aha’ moment. No, a thought cannot do anything. There was a thought ‘I move my hand’ and the hand did not move. Of course, you could say there was also a thought not to move it (perhaps in a split second after the first thought to move it), but the point remains that a thought by itself – internal words or images – cannot do anything. So, part of the previous answer was wrong, the body cannot be moved by thoughts.
Also, typically, no thoughts to move the body precede movements of the body. It just happens. But even if a thought to move the body does precede the movement of the body, the thought itself didn’t initiate the movement. Mental words and images don’t command muscles and move bodies.

Can a thought see, touch, hear ... ?

Thoughts obviously cannot experience anything. They cannot see, touch, hear… They can only be experienced.

What makes sensations labelled “body” happen?

From direct experience there are only these raw sensations, which are then labelled ‘body’ by thought. There is no experience of what makes these raw sensations happen. It is not thoughts, not other sensations, not sounds, not colors, etc. There is no direct experience of something producing the phenomena that are experienced directly.

Look at the clouds in the sky. Are they moving according to anyone's direction?

They are not moving according to anyone’s direction. When I look at the sky, all I see is clouds moving. I don’t see a mover. I may feel wind though – but that is just a simultaneous but – reporting from direct experience – unrelated experience. Only in a thought would / could I connect the tactile sensation of the wind with the visual experience of the moving clouds. (note that also attributing the tactile sensation to the wind and the visual experience to clouds in the sky, requires thought).

How is the movement of hands different from the movement of clouds?

It is exactly the same. In direct experience all I notice is the movement of the hand. I don’t experience a mover. No, in fact, all I experience are sensations, colors, etc. that I attribute to a moving hand in thought. So, there’s even no direct experience of a moving hand, let alone what moved the hand.

Can a sensation do anything? Can a sense see, touch, hear ... ?

A sensation, like anything else that appears in DE cannot do anything. It cannot see, touch, hear, etc.

How is the “pumping of the heart” observed in DE without thought content?

The pumping of the heart is not observed in DE. Sensations can be attributed to a pumping heart by thought, but without thought this is not experienced.

Do you see another sensation labelled “body” making it happen?

No sensations labelled ‘body’ can make anything happen. Nothing in DE can make anything happen. The label ‘body’ or the thought ‘body’ cannot make anything happen (no thought can).

Remember the coloured socks exercise?

I don’t remember the coloured socks exercise and can’t seem to find it in the thread. Same as the apple exercise or the other DE exercises?

Thank you again Rali for your patience and very helpful guidance!

Much love,

Michael

[poppyseed]

Hi Mick
It is my pleasure guiding you :)

From direct experience, the sensations labeled as coming from a ‘hand’ are not different from the sensations labeled as coming from a ‘leg’. Both consist of an ever-changing stream of sensations of vibration, heat/cold, tingling, etc.

Very good! And “vibration”, “heat”, “cold”, “tingling” are labels too, right, trying to describe that raw sensing…

The pumping of the heart is not observed in DE. Sensations can be attributed to a pumping heart by thought, but without thought this is not experienced.

“Pumping of the heart” is just a label for a sensation, right?

I don’t remember the coloured socks exercise and can’t seem to find it in the thread. Same as the apple exercise or the other DE exercises?

It is in the top of my reply from Thu Mar 30, 2023 4:50 pm. The same post as the apple exercise. It is just describing how to look for DE.

Now, let’s have a look at the idea of control, choice and decisions. Please explore the three exercises below and report your findings

1. Hold a hand in front of you; palm turned down. Now turn the palm up. And down...and up and so on.
2. Put two objects that you like in front of you (e.g. a cup of coffee and a glass of juice), then pick up one or the other, while paying attention to the whole process of choosing.
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’ or and entity that is choosing 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.

3. Can you take me through a decision that you made recently - not something very personal so you share more details about it? How did it come to be? Consider all of the conditions that were necessary for it to happen. If any one of those conditions were different, would the outcome have been the same? How many of these conditions were outside of your influence? What was in your control (according to thought)?
Please give me some details about your decision making...

Love
Rali

[Mick]

Hi Rali,

And “vibration”, “heat”, “cold”, “tingling” are labels too, right, trying to describe that raw sensing…

Indeed, any report on direct experience consists of applying labels (words) to the DE.

“Pumping of the heart” is just a label for a sensation, right?

Yes, or a label for a series of sensations.

Now, let’s have a look at the idea of control, choice and decisions. Please explore the three exercises below and report your findings

1. Hold a hand in front of you; palm turned down. 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?

I have no DE of how the movement is controlled (or initiated). All that is experienced are sensations that can be attributed to the movement (by a thought / label) and other unrelated raw sensations.

Does a thought control it?

No, a thought does not control it. There’s often no experience of a thought preceding the experience of the sensations associated with the movement. Thoughts did arise to speed up the movement and stop it. Sometimes this happened, but not necessarily so. Even if it does, it is not the thought (the internal monologue) controlling or choosing (the speed of) the motion. This is obvious since the movement does not always and necessarily follow the thought about the movement. And – as pointed out – there is no DE of something controlling or deciding. So from DE, nothing controls the movement, thoughts do not control the movement.

Can a ‘controller’ or and entity that is choosing be located?

No, nowhere to be found in DE.

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.

There is no DE of a decision to turn the hand over. Of course, it is possible to have thoughts with the content ‘turn the hand’ followed by (sensations associated with) the turning of the hand. But there is no DE of a link between thoughts and the turning of the hand. Clearly, as pointed out, thoughts (as in inner monologues) by themselves do not cause the hand to move, since sometimes the hand won’t move after a thought appears to move it and since often no thought will precede the movement.
So, from DE all there is while doing this exercise are sensations and sights associated with the turning of a hand and thoughts with contents like: ‘turn your hand’, ‘don’t turn it’, ‘turn it faster, slower’, etc.) without any relation between all these raw sensations and no indication of what produced these sensations and thoughts.

2. Put two objects that you like in front of you (e.g. a cup of coffee and a glass of juice), then pick up one or the other, while paying attention to the whole process of choosing.
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?

I put a meal replacement shake and some pieces of chocolate in front of me.
It took a while before anything was picked up. There were thoughts like: will the chocolate taste better before or after having a sip of the shake?
Then the thought popped up, I’ll have the shake first. But I wrote this and didn’t pick up anything.
Then another thought ‘maybe the chocolate first’.
Then, quickly after typing this last sentence, the shake was picked up and sips were taken.
Then, with my hands on the keyboard, the urge came to drink from the shake again, but I first wrote this.
In the next moments nothing was picked up. Then, I had a piece of chocolate.
Then thoughts about alternating chocolate and shake, but nothing was picked up for a while. And so on.

In direct / actual experience: there were lots of sensations (associated with picking up, tasting) and thoughts (contents of which I described above), but no experience of choosing or controlling the movement of picking something up.

Does a thought control it?

No, interestingly often there is no follow through on the content of thoughts (e.g. nothing is picked up after having a thought to pick something up). Equally interesting, there often is no thought preceding an action (picking up something). But even if picking up the shake follows the thought of picking up the shake, it is not the content of the thought that is moving the body. Rather the thought appears and the sensations associated with the movement of the body appear – and from DE, the appearance of the thought(s) and sensations are unrelated.

Can a ‘controller’ or and entity that is choosing be located?

No, there’s no DE of what controls or chooses. A choice cannot be found in a thought or in a sensation. So, obviously, it cannot be located. Sometimes there is a sensation which could be labeled as an urge preceding an action, but it is not the urge making the choice or forcing a decision since at other times the urge is not followed up by an action. Also, there is no direct experience of what produced the sensations labeled as ‘urge’.

3. Can you take me through a decision that you made recently - not something very personal so you share more details about it?

This morning I decided to listen to a podcast on cycling while cycling on the indoor trainer. My initial plan was to listen to a podcast on the ‘Waking up’ app, but then I saw there was a new episode in the cycling podcast and the thought and decision happened to listen to that instead.

How did it come to be?

After seeing the new episode of the cycling podcast when surfing the internet, sensations labeled as a desire to watch it popped up. Then thoughts formed ‘let’s do this’, ‘I want to take a break from listening to the more intellectually demanding podcasts’, etc. Then, while preparing to start cycling thoughts appeared like ‘ah, right, I was going to listen to the cycling podcast’ then actions followed to execute this plan.

Consider all of the conditions that were necessary for it to happen.

The existence of the episode / podcast.
Having a smartphone on which to play the podcast and wifi and a speaker and a bike on a trainer, etc.
Seeing the new episode while surfing the internet.
The decision (which also came about through a series of conditions that were met) to cycle on the trainer and listen to a podcast.
Sensations that can be labeled as a desire to listen to this episode or as a preference to listen to this one over another one.

If any one of those conditions were different, would the outcome have been the same?

No, if any one of those conditions were absent or if any one of these conditions were sufficiently different, the outcome would very likely have been different.

How many of these conditions were outside of your influence? What was in your control (according to thought)?
Please give me some details about your decision making...

All of these conditions were outside of my control.
- Obviously the existence of the podcast / new episode. But also seeing it – by chance when checking cycling news.
- Obviously, having these pieces of technology: smartphone, wifi, speakers, bike, etc. depends on people (in the past) inventing and producing those.
- Cycling on the trainer is something I do regularly, but the fact that I did it today depends on other conditions over which ultimately I have no control – I ran a lot lately since I was away with no bike, there’s a desire to alternate running and cycling, it was raining outside so a preference for indoor riding, etc.
- Also, pushing it back further, the fact that I cycle at all depends on a number of conditions over which I have no control: the emergence of cycling as a sport, sensations that can be labeled as wanting to do this sport, etc. I have no control over that, this just happened and so a habit to cycle formed.
- Sensations that can be labeled as wanting or preferring to listen to the cycling podcast also just popped up. I have no control over that.

Much love,

Michael

[Mick]

Hi Rali,

And “vibration”, “heat”, “cold”, “tingling” are labels too, right, trying to describe that raw sensing…

Indeed, any report on direct experience consists of applying labels (words) to the DE.

“Pumping of the heart” is just a label for a sensation, right?

Yes, or a label for a series of sensations.

Now, let’s have a look at the idea of control, choice and decisions. Please explore the three exercises below and report your findings

1. Hold a hand in front of you; palm turned down. 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?

I have no DE of how the movement is controlled (or initiated). All that is experienced are sensations that can be attributed to the movement (by a thought / label) and other unrelated raw sensations.

Does a thought control it?

No, a thought does not control it. There’s often no experience of a thought preceding the experience of the sensations associated with the movement. Thoughts did arise to speed up the movement and stop it. Sometimes this happened, but not necessarily so. Even if it does, it is not the thought (the internal monologue) controlling or choosing (the speed of) the motion. This is obvious since the movement does not always and necessarily follow the thought about the movement. And – as pointed out – there is no DE of something controlling or deciding. So from DE, nothing controls the movement, thoughts do not control the movement.

Can a ‘controller’ or and entity that is choosing be located?

No, nowhere to be found in DE.

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.

There is no DE of a decision to turn the hand over. Of course, it is possible to have thoughts with the content ‘turn the hand’ followed by (sensations associated with) the turning of the hand. But there is no DE of a link between thoughts and the turning of the hand. Clearly, as pointed out, thoughts (as in inner monologues) by themselves do not cause the hand to move, since sometimes the hand won’t move after a thought appears to move it and since often no thought will precede the movement.
So, from DE all there is while doing this exercise are sensations and sights associated with the turning of a hand and thoughts with contents like: ‘turn your hand’, ‘don’t turn it’, ‘turn it faster, slower’, etc.) without any relation between all these raw sensations and no indication of what produced these sensations and thoughts.

2. Put two objects that you like in front of you (e.g. a cup of coffee and a glass of juice), then pick up one or the other, while paying attention to the whole process of choosing.
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?

I put a meal replacement shake and some pieces of chocolate in front of me.
It took a while before anything was picked up. There were thoughts like: will the chocolate taste better before or after having a sip of the shake?
Then the thought popped up, I’ll have the shake first. But I wrote this and didn’t pick up anything.
Then another thought ‘maybe the chocolate first’.
Then, quickly after typing this last sentence, the shake was picked up and sips were taken.
Then, with my hands on the keyboard, the urge came to drink from the shake again, but I first wrote this.
In the next moments nothing was picked up. Then, I had a piece of chocolate.
Then thoughts about alternating chocolate and shake, but nothing was picked up for a while. And so on.

In direct / actual experience: there were lots of sensations (associated with picking up, tasting) and thoughts (contents of which I described above), but no experience of choosing or controlling the movement of picking something up.

Does a thought control it?

No, interestingly often there is no follow through on the content of thoughts (e.g. nothing is picked up after having a thought to pick something up). Equally interesting, there often is no thought preceding an action (picking up something). But even if picking up the shake follows the thought of picking up the shake, it is not the content of the thought that is moving the body. Rather the thought appears and the sensations associated with the movement of the body appear – and from DE, the appearance of the thought(s) and sensations are unrelated.

Can a ‘controller’ or and entity that is choosing be located?

No, there’s no DE of what controls or chooses. A choice cannot be found in a thought or in a sensation. So, obviously, it cannot be located. Sometimes there is a sensation which could be labeled as an urge preceding an action, but it is not the urge making the choice or forcing a decision since at other times the urge is not followed up by an action. Also, there is no direct experience of what produced the sensations labeled as ‘urge’.

3. Can you take me through a decision that you made recently - not something very personal so you share more details about it?

This morning I decided to listen to a podcast on cycling while cycling on the indoor trainer. My initial plan was to listen to a podcast on the ‘Waking up’ app, but then I saw there was a new episode in the cycling podcast and the thought and decision happened to listen to that instead.

How did it come to be?

After seeing the new episode of the cycling podcast when surfing the internet, sensations labeled as a desire to watch it popped up. Then thoughts formed ‘let’s do this’, ‘I want to take a break from listening to the more intellectually demanding podcasts’, etc. Then, while preparing to start cycling thoughts appeared like ‘ah, right, I was going to listen to the cycling podcast’ then actions followed to execute this plan.

Consider all of the conditions that were necessary for it to happen.

The existence of the episode / podcast.
Having a smartphone on which to play the podcast and wifi and a speaker and a bike on a trainer, etc.
Seeing the new episode while surfing the internet.
The decision (which also came about through a series of conditions that were met) to cycle on the trainer and listen to a podcast.
Sensations that can be labeled as a desire to listen to this episode or as a preference to listen to this one over another one.

If any one of those conditions were different, would the outcome have been the same?

No, if any one of those conditions were absent or if any one of these conditions were sufficiently different, the outcome would very likely have been different.

How many of these conditions were outside of your influence? What was in your control (according to thought)?
Please give me some details about your decision making...

All of these conditions were outside of my control.
- Obviously the existence of the podcast / new episode. But also seeing it – by chance when checking cycling news.
- Obviously, having these pieces of technology: smartphone, wifi, speakers, bike, etc. depends on people (in the past) inventing and producing those.
- Cycling on the trainer is something I do regularly, but the fact that I did it today depends on other conditions over which ultimately I have no control – I ran a lot lately since I was away with no bike, there’s a desire to alternate running and cycling, it was raining outside so a preference for indoor riding, etc.
- Also, pushing it back further, the fact that I cycle at all depends on a number of conditions over which I have no control: the emergence of cycling as a sport, sensations that can be labeled as wanting to do this sport, etc. I have no control over that, this just happened and so a habit to cycle formed.
- Sensations that can be labeled as wanting or preferring to listen to the cycling podcast also just popped up. I have no control over that.

Much love,

Michael

[Mick]

Hi Rali,

And “vibration”, “heat”, “cold”, “tingling” are labels too, right, trying to describe that raw sensing…

Indeed, any report on direct experience consists of applying labels (words) to the DE.

“Pumping of the heart” is just a label for a sensation, right?

Yes, or a label for a series of sensations.

Now, let’s have a look at the idea of control, choice and decisions. Please explore the three exercises below and report your findings

1. Hold a hand in front of you; palm turned down. 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?

I have no DE of how the movement is controlled (or initiated). All that is experienced are sensations that can be attributed to the movement (by a thought / label) and other unrelated raw sensations.

Does a thought control it?

No, a thought does not control it. There’s often no experience of a thought preceding the experience of the sensations associated with the movement. Thoughts did arise to speed up the movement and stop it. Sometimes this happened, but not necessarily so. Even if it does, it is not the thought (the internal monologue) controlling or choosing (the speed of) the motion. This is obvious since the movement does not always and necessarily follow the thought about the movement. And – as pointed out – there is no DE of something controlling or deciding. So from DE, nothing controls the movement, thoughts do not control the movement.

Can a ‘controller’ or and entity that is choosing be located?

No, nowhere to be found in DE.

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.

There is no DE of a decision to turn the hand over. Of course, it is possible to have thoughts with the content ‘turn the hand’ followed by (sensations associated with) the turning of the hand. But there is no DE of a link between thoughts and the turning of the hand. Clearly, as pointed out, thoughts (as in inner monologues) by themselves do not cause the hand to move, since sometimes the hand won’t move after a thought appears to move it and since often no thought will precede the movement.
So, from DE all there is while doing this exercise are sensations and sights associated with the turning of a hand and thoughts with contents like: ‘turn your hand’, ‘don’t turn it’, ‘turn it faster, slower’, etc.) without any relation between all these raw sensations and no indication of what produced these sensations and thoughts.

2. Put two objects that you like in front of you (e.g. a cup of coffee and a glass of juice), then pick up one or the other, while paying attention to the whole process of choosing.
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?

I put a meal replacement shake and some pieces of chocolate in front of me.
It took a while before anything was picked up. There were thoughts like: will the chocolate taste better before or after having a sip of the shake?
Then the thought popped up, I’ll have the shake first. But I wrote this and didn’t pick up anything.
Then another thought ‘maybe the chocolate first’.
Then, quickly after typing this last sentence, the shake was picked up and sips were taken.
Then, with my hands on the keyboard, the urge came to drink from the shake again, but I first wrote this.
In the next moments nothing was picked up. Then, I had a piece of chocolate.
Then thoughts about alternating chocolate and shake, but nothing was picked up for a while. And so on.

In direct / actual experience: there were lots of sensations (associated with picking up, tasting) and thoughts (contents of which I described above), but no experience of choosing or controlling the movement of picking something up.

Does a thought control it?

No, interestingly often there is no follow through on the content of thoughts (e.g. nothing is picked up after having a thought to pick something up). Equally interesting, there often is no thought preceding an action (picking up something). But even if picking up the shake follows the thought of picking up the shake, it is not the content of the thought that is moving the body. Rather the thought appears and the sensations associated with the movement of the body appear – and from DE, the appearance of the thought(s) and sensations are unrelated.

Can a ‘controller’ or and entity that is choosing be located?

No, there’s no DE of what controls or chooses. A choice cannot be found in a thought or in a sensation. So, obviously, it cannot be located. Sometimes there is a sensation which could be labeled as an urge preceding an action, but it is not the urge making the choice or forcing a decision since at other times the urge is not followed up by an action. Also, there is no direct experience of what produced the sensations labeled as ‘urge’.

3. Can you take me through a decision that you made recently - not something very personal so you share more details about it?

This morning I decided to listen to a podcast on cycling while cycling on the indoor trainer. My initial plan was to listen to a podcast on the ‘Waking up’ app, but then I saw there was a new episode in the cycling podcast and the thought and decision happened to listen to that instead.

How did it come to be?

After seeing the new episode of the cycling podcast when surfing the internet, sensations labeled as a desire to watch it popped up. Then thoughts formed ‘let’s do this’, ‘I want to take a break from listening to the more intellectually demanding podcasts’, etc. Then, while preparing to start cycling thoughts appeared like ‘ah, right, I was going to listen to the cycling podcast’ then actions followed to execute this plan.

Consider all of the conditions that were necessary for it to happen.

The existence of the episode / podcast.
Having a smartphone on which to play the podcast and wifi and a speaker and a bike on a trainer, etc.
Seeing the new episode while surfing the internet.
The decision (which also came about through a series of conditions that were met) to cycle on the trainer and listen to a podcast.
Sensations that can be labeled as a desire to listen to this episode or as a preference to listen to this one over another one.

If any one of those conditions were different, would the outcome have been the same?

No, if any one of those conditions were absent or if any one of these conditions were sufficiently different, the outcome would very likely have been different.

How many of these conditions were outside of your influence? What was in your control (according to thought)?
Please give me some details about your decision making...

All of these conditions were outside of my control.
- Obviously the existence of the podcast / new episode. But also seeing it – by chance when checking cycling news.
- Obviously, having these pieces of technology: smartphone, wifi, speakers, bike, etc. depends on people (in the past) inventing and producing those.
- Cycling on the trainer is something I do regularly, but the fact that I did it today depends on other conditions over which ultimately I have no control – I ran a lot lately since I was away with no bike, there’s a desire to alternate running and cycling, it was raining outside so a preference for indoor riding, etc.
- Also, pushing it back further, the fact that I cycle at all depends on a number of conditions over which I have no control: the emergence of cycling as a sport, sensations that can be labeled as wanting to do this sport, etc. I have no control over that, this just happened and so a habit to cycle formed.
- Sensations that can be labeled as wanting or preferring to listen to the cycling podcast also just popped up. I have no control over that.

Much love,

Michael

[Mick]

Hi Rali,

And “vibration”, “heat”, “cold”, “tingling” are labels too, right, trying to describe that raw sensing…

Indeed, any report on direct experience consists of applying labels (words) to the DE.

“Pumping of the heart” is just a label for a sensation, right?

Yes, or a label for a series of sensations.

Now, let’s have a look at the idea of control, choice and decisions. Please explore the three exercises below and report your findings

1. Hold a hand in front of you; palm turned down. 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?

I have no DE of how the movement is controlled (or initiated). All that is experienced are sensations that can be attributed to the movement (by a thought / label) and other unrelated raw sensations.

Does a thought control it?

No, a thought does not control it. There’s often no experience of a thought preceding the experience of the sensations associated with the movement. Thoughts did arise to speed up the movement and stop it. Sometimes this happened, but not necessarily so. Even if it does, it is not the thought (the internal monologue) controlling or choosing (the speed of) the motion. This is obvious since the movement does not always and necessarily follow the thought about the movement. And – as pointed out – there is no DE of something controlling or deciding. So from DE, nothing controls the movement, thoughts do not control the movement.

Can a ‘controller’ or and entity that is choosing be located?

No, nowhere to be found in DE.

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.

There is no DE of a decision to turn the hand over. Of course, it is possible to have thoughts with the content ‘turn the hand’ followed by (sensations associated with) the turning of the hand. But there is no DE of a link between thoughts and the turning of the hand. Clearly, as pointed out, thoughts (as in inner monologues) by themselves do not cause the hand to move, since sometimes the hand won’t move after a thought appears to move it and since often no thought will precede the movement.
So, from DE all there is while doing this exercise are sensations and sights associated with the turning of a hand and thoughts with contents like: ‘turn your hand’, ‘don’t turn it’, ‘turn it faster, slower’, etc.) without any relation between all these raw sensations and no indication of what produced these sensations and thoughts.

2. Put two objects that you like in front of you (e.g. a cup of coffee and a glass of juice), then pick up one or the other, while paying attention to the whole process of choosing.
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?

I put a meal replacement shake and some pieces of chocolate in front of me.
It took a while before anything was picked up. There were thoughts like: will the chocolate taste better before or after having a sip of the shake?
Then the thought popped up, I’ll have the shake first. But I wrote this and didn’t pick up anything.
Then another thought ‘maybe the chocolate first’.
Then, quickly after typing this last sentence, the shake was picked up and sips were taken.
Then, with my hands on the keyboard, the urge came to drink from the shake again, but I first wrote this.
In the next moments nothing was picked up. Then, I had a piece of chocolate.
Then thoughts about alternating chocolate and shake, but nothing was picked up for a while. And so on.

In direct / actual experience: there were lots of sensations (associated with picking up, tasting) and thoughts (contents of which I described above), but no experience of choosing or controlling the movement of picking something up.

Does a thought control it?

No, interestingly often there is no follow through on the content of thoughts (e.g. nothing is picked up after having a thought to pick something up). Equally interesting, there often is no thought preceding an action (picking up something). But even if picking up the shake follows the thought of picking up the shake, it is not the content of the thought that is moving the body. Rather the thought appears and the sensations associated with the movement of the body appear – and from DE, the appearance of the thought(s) and sensations are unrelated.

Can a ‘controller’ or and entity that is choosing be located?

No, there’s no DE of what controls or chooses. A choice cannot be found in a thought or in a sensation. So, obviously, it cannot be located. Sometimes there is a sensation which could be labeled as an urge preceding an action, but it is not the urge making the choice or forcing a decision since at other times the urge is not followed up by an action. Also, there is no direct experience of what produced the sensations labeled as ‘urge’.

3. Can you take me through a decision that you made recently - not something very personal so you share more details about it?

This morning I decided to listen to a podcast on cycling while cycling on the indoor trainer. My initial plan was to listen to a podcast on the ‘Waking up’ app, but then I saw there was a new episode in the cycling podcast and the thought and decision happened to listen to that instead.

How did it come to be?

After seeing the new episode of the cycling podcast when surfing the internet, sensations labeled as a desire to watch it popped up. Then thoughts formed ‘let’s do this’, ‘I want to take a break from listening to the more intellectually demanding podcasts’, etc. Then, while preparing to start cycling thoughts appeared like ‘ah, right, I was going to listen to the cycling podcast’ then actions followed to execute this plan.

Consider all of the conditions that were necessary for it to happen.

The existence of the episode / podcast.
Having a smartphone on which to play the podcast and wifi and a speaker and a bike on a trainer, etc.
Seeing the new episode while surfing the internet.
The decision (which also came about through a series of conditions that were met) to cycle on the trainer and listen to a podcast.
Sensations that can be labeled as a desire to listen to this episode or as a preference to listen to this one over another one.

If any one of those conditions were different, would the outcome have been the same?

No, if any one of those conditions were absent or if any one of these conditions were sufficiently different, the outcome would very likely have been different.

How many of these conditions were outside of your influence? What was in your control (according to thought)?
Please give me some details about your decision making...

All of these conditions were outside of my control.
- Obviously the existence of the podcast / new episode. But also seeing it – by chance when checking cycling news.
- Obviously, having these pieces of technology: smartphone, wifi, speakers, bike, etc. depends on people (in the past) inventing and producing those.
- Cycling on the trainer is something I do regularly, but the fact that I did it today depends on other conditions over which ultimately I have no control – I ran a lot lately since I was away with no bike, there’s a desire to alternate running and cycling, it was raining outside so a preference for indoor riding, etc.
- Also, pushing it back further, the fact that I cycle at all depends on a number of conditions over which I have no control: the emergence of cycling as a sport, sensations that can be labeled as wanting to do this sport, etc. I have no control over that, this just happened and so a habit to cycle formed.
- Sensations that can be labeled as wanting or preferring to listen to the cycling podcast also just popped up. I have no control over that.

Much love,

Michael

[poppyseed]

Hi Mick

Great stuff!!! I really liked how you approached the exercises - with openness and inquisitiveness!

In direct / actual experience: there were lots of sensations (associated with picking up, tasting) and thoughts (contents of which I described above), but no experience of choosing or controlling the movement of picking something up.

Great! How does that make you feel?

No, if any one of those conditions were absent or if any one of these conditions were sufficiently different, the outcome would very likely have been different.

So was there a decision at all or just a description (accurate or not) of whatever was already happening?
I think this video might interest you:
https://vimeo.com/90101368?fbclid=IwAR3

At this point, it will be a good DE exercise to get out for an actual walk in nature and observe interconnectedness. See how ALL is moving interdependently, including thinking and the senses. Hold these questions in mind:
Is there anything that is separate from everything else?
Is there a border that divides “me” and “my body” from everything else, or is it just a thought? Is that interdependent movement outside of you? Is there an “inside” and an “outside”?
Is there an owner of being?
Are there others? Is there an “I” in others?
Is there a “you”?
Love
R

[Mick]

Thanks Rali!

How does it make you feel that there is no experience of deciding or choosing?

There’s a sense of wonder and a sense of relieve: no need to strain to make good things happen and avoid bad things. There’s nothing to do, since there’s nothing I can do.

So was there a decision at all or just a description (accurate or not) of whatever was already happening?

No, very clearly, at no point was there a decision. The major factor was that sensations popped up while seeing the new podcast episode and that lead ultimately to listening to it. But the manifestation of these sensations (which can be labeled as ‘wanting’) was not the result of a choice. It just happened. Same for the thoughts happening later – thoughts containing the plan to listen to the episode and then later thoughts remembering to listen to the episode – they just popped up.
But most of the stuff we do, isn’t preceded by sensations that can be labeled as wanting and thoughts with the content of ‘let’s do this’. It just happens out of habit patterns. Also, when turning the hand, there was no DE of deciding to turn the hand and no connection between thoughts of turning / not turning and doing so. It all just happens: behavior, thoughts, sensations… There is a relation between those (e.g. between thoughts, desire-sensations and actions): desires and thoughts influence actions, thoughts produce sensations and vice versa, etc. but the influence arrow points in all directions and their strength varies from instance to instance.

think this video might interest you:
https://vimeo.com/90101368?fbclid=IwAR3

Indeed, very interesting! Free will is an illusion. I was aware of the neuroscience behind this, but the introspection we’re engaging in here also shows this clearly! Sensations, thoughts and behavior just happen without a ‘general manager’ being in charge and commanding the body.

At this point, it will be a good DE exercise to get out for an actual walk in nature and observe interconnectedness. See how ALL is moving interdependently, including thinking and the senses. Hold these questions in mind:
Is there anything that is separate from everything else?

I went outside, observed clouds, plants, trees, birds, chickens and a rabbit. I noticed the interconnectedness: clouds move with the wind, trees sway with the wind, birds react to sounds, chickens react to the food I gave, as does the rabbit, etc. Everything is connected to everything else. Nothing in nature / reality exists or acts in isolation.

Is there a border that divides “me” and “my body” from everything else, or is it just a thought?

From DE there’s no border / outer edge of ‘me’ or ‘my body’ – I feel sensations, see colors, etc. Only with thought can I attribute these sensations to my body and interpret some of these colors as demarcating parts of my body. Separating me from the rest of the world is therefore just a thought (albeit a thought that is very tenacious and enduring).

Is that interdependent movement outside of you? Is there an “inside” and an “outside”?

From DE the interdependence is neither inside nor outside my body – since there is no inside and outside. All there is, are sensations, colors, sounds, thoughts, smells and tastes. Dividing the world in discrete units (me, other people, animals, trees, houses, etc) is done by thought, it isn’t in the actual experience. But, again, this mental construction comes naturally and is very tenacious.

Is there an owner of being?

No. All of it happens automatically and interdependently. No one owns or controls any part of it. I watched the chickens and the rabbit closely and very clearly there is no owner / controller of their behavior – they react to their environment as trees react to wind (only perhaps in a less predictable way). The same goes for humans. It is all just happening, the world unfolds. Water flows, wind moves, rocks erode, plants grow and wither, animals move, grow and die, humans move, talk, grow and die.
And from a DE perspective: life is nothing but a constant stream of raw sensations. There’s no stopping it, controlling it or changing any of it. Sights, sounds, smells, tastes, sensations and thoughts happen, that’s all there’s too it. Is that the key insight of non-duality? Should I try to come back to the DE of these raw sensations often – labeling everything in terms of sights, sounds, thoughts, etc?

Are there others? Is there an “I” in others?

Clearly not. I watched people eating, talking with each other, then being distracted by something, resuming their conversation, focusing on their meal again, etc. All of it happening completely spontaneously and interdependently. No need for a controlling and deciding self – sensations (urges, aversions), habit patterns, thoughts arising leading to sensations leading to actions, reactions, …

Is there a “you”?

No. From DE there are only raw sensations and thoughts. These seem to come out of nowhere. There is no I deciding, choosing, or planning anything. There may be thoughts with the content of ‘I will do this’, but this thought just came out of nowhere. Just like the chickens and rabbits and other people I observed, I’m an organic robot with phenomenal experiences (raw sensations).
My separate existence and my self-descriptions are the product of thoughts: mental constructs. They are not revealed in direct experience. Even stronger, the absence of a mental ‘I’ running the show is clear from DE. All that ‘I’ do results from things and processes that are completely beyond ‘my’ control (sensations, thoughts). There is no entity that chooses how to act, what to think and what to experience. Nothing in experience can be controlled or even influenced. Life unfolds and experience happens.
There is still a pretty tenacious belief that – although there is no ‘I’ in charge of any of it, no ‘I’ controlling – all of those direct experiences are still happening to me. There is no doer or thinker but the impression remains that there is an experiencer. I see that there is not the experience and then a separate ‘I’ witnessing or experiencing that experience. The witnessing / awareness is an integral part of the direct experience. There is in this sense only the direct experience – no need for a separate experiencer. But this remains a thought. How should I go about in directly experiencing that there is no separate experiencer? Or am I seeing / framing this the wrong way?