Almost there

[NoSpoon]

A good example might be to look at how your body responded to making an account here at Liberation Unleashed. Did it feel a certain way in the body (if you can remember)?

To help you get a sense for this, and maybe finding your own answer, pay attention during the coming day or two to how your body lives life.

Do you notice being drawn to some things and not others?

What is the experience like (without the mind interfering)?

I know exactly what you mean. When things are right (going to the gym when I'm lazy, telling the truth in spots where it would be beneficial to lie, helping someone in need when I'm really tired and just want to go to bed etc) the energy in the body does seem harmonious and evenly spread out. Nothing stands out. There's a feeling of doing the right thing and once I start doing it, it actually feels effortless.

When things go the opposite way, the energy seems to become very strong on the upper part of the body and out of balance with the rest of it. This creates a disbalance and contrast, which causes resistance. Feels like some sort of inner alarm is going off and the urge comes up to fix something that's triggering the alarm.

A question came up while I was writing this: Sometimes it's clear what the cause of resistance is, but sometimes it's not and it just feels like there is no reason for it at all (probably just because I can not see it). Now that you explained the process it is easier to recognise what's going on and work on it instead of just labelling it as 'a bad day' and distracting myself with a movie, but is there an exercise or some steps that you know of on how to look for the source of resistance when it's not so clear? I know this forum is not about that, but I would appreciate advice if you have any from your own experience.

P.S I feel very grateful and want to thank you deeply for your guidance. I don't do this after every post, but I hope you know I appreciate your time and effort.

[Bluejay]

Feels like some sort of inner alarm is going off and the urge comes up to fix something that's triggering the alarm.

Yes, it can be a good alarm. It doesn't have to be to fix something. It can be a nudge to inquire into what is going on.

A question came up while I was writing this: Sometimes it's clear what the cause of resistance is, but sometimes it's not and it just feels like there is no reason for it at all (probably just because I can not see it). Now that you explained the process it is easier to recognise what's going on and work on it instead of just labelling it as 'a bad day' and distracting myself with a movie, but is there an exercise or some steps that you know of on how to look for the source of resistance when it's not so clear?

It isn't always necessary to know the reason. I don't go digging for it. It usually presents itself if it wants to be known, but sometimes an exploration happens.

A few things you can try:

1. Sit with the resistance/feeling. Welcome it fully in your body. Let go of all resistances trying to hold it in place. Let it move freely in your body. Thoughts may try to distract you, but keep coming back to the feeling. Doing this will sometimes bring up images, sounds, sensations that provide further information. And sometimes the resistance will just dissolve.

2. As you feel into the feeling, you can ask questions such as: What does this remind me of?
What would I have to face if this resistance was gone?
What's beneath this resistance?

3. Sometimes you sit with it, it's still there, and you have to go on with your day. In those cases you can welcome wanting to resist the resistance. Let it be there and go about your day.

4. Check out Ilona's video on fear (use resistance instead of fear in your case): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKX1llYtlKE

P.S I feel very grateful and want to thank you deeply for your guidance. I don't do this after every post, but I hope you know I appreciate your time and effort.

Thank you. Your words are very much appreciated. And know that I am happy to do this :)

I know this forum is not about that, but I would appreciate advice if you have any from your own experience.

It's not a problem at all. Feel free to ask any questions you want.

***

OK, now that you're familiar with the body yes/no, let's do some exploring.

Explore ‘Sense of Self'

Let’s say that you have lost your keys and you swear that you left them in your coat. You go to look and check all the pockets - the keys are not there.

You swear they must be as that was the last place you remember them. You have a vivid memory of putting them there after you left the house. But when you check they are not there. At this point you can keep believing that the keys are in your pocket, or you can admit you were mistaken.

This is just like that. You may see clearly that the self is an illusion but still feel a sense of self - just like the keys. But feeling something to be true and seeing that it is or is not is different. This is why we may find ourselves coming back to your expectations at the start and at the end.

Now, I’d like to ask you to explore this sense of self very-very thoroughly. Not by thinking about it, but by FEELING it. Keep the focus of attention on the sense of self and inquire:

Does the sense of self have a location?

Does the sense of self have a shape or a size?

Does the sense of self say or communicate anything?

If the answer is yes, how does the sense do this exactly?

Does the sense of self have any characteristics or attributes?

What is the sense of self ‘made of’? An image? Sound? Taste? Smell? Sensation? Thought?

What is found?

[NoSpoon]

Does the sense of self have a location?

It does not have a location that I can point to. The closest I can get is that it's the end destination of all the senses. It not a something that is AT a certain location, but rather a location itself where everything that is seen, heard or smelled arrives. Therefore I call it an experiencer, who can not choose what and if to experience.

Does the sense of self have a shape or a size?

No, its shapeless, made of nothing. It is not like a tree that stands IN the park, but it's the park WHERE the trees stand. It is in an empty space where the senses arrive as they are sensed.

Does the sense of self say or communicate anything?

No, it doesn't do anything at all. It's more like a blackhole to which the continuos river of senses flow into.

Does the sense of self have any characteristics or attributes?

The best way I can describe it is that it's like an end point of every sense. Like a black hole. Like an invisible gate through which all the senses go before they evaporate and become memories.

What is the sense of self ‘made of’? An image? Sound? Taste? Smell? Sensation? Thought?

Emptiness. Can not be touched, smelled, heard or anything like that. When I say it like that it becomes clear that it must be just a belief that is made out of thin air, created by the mind. Like the word 'Park'. Parks do not really exists, they are a concept, a word that is used to summarize a bunch of different objects put in the same area (trees, benches, roads, trashcans etc). You can not touch the park, you can only touch objects that are in the park. Still, we use that word as if it points to a physical object in the physical world. When answering all the above questions it feels a lot like me going to a park and trying to find it, but all I can find is trees, flowers, people, benches, roads. Then I get confused - if the objects 'are', then there must be a 'where' that they are at. If the senses arrive, then there must be something where they arrive at. But it's just a wordplay. It's not true. A tree can just stand be without a why, what and where. Senses can come without a 'where at' as well. At this moment it is super clear that the self is just a word that has nothing at the other end of it. Still the sense of 'self' keeps appearing, but it's ok. The mind is so used to thinking that it can not just stop. You don't go from driving a car at 200mph to 0mph instantly. It has to keep on moving for a while before it can stop.
---------
Before posting this, I read it all again and noticed that the last part where discoveries where made were done by thinking and not DE. We agreed that I will only use DE and so now I want to delete it all. But I wont, because I feel it's important to share this discovery.

Thank you!

[Bluejay]

Before posting this, I read it all again and noticed that the last part where discoveries where made were done by thinking and not DE. We agreed that I will only use DE and so now I want to delete it all. But I wont, because I feel it's important to share this discovery.

Thank you for leaving it in. As a guide, it's helpful to see the process, even if it's not following the instructions perfectly.

Senses can come without a 'where at' as well. At this moment it is super clear that the self is just a word that has nothing at the other end of it. Still the sense of 'self' keeps appearing, but it's ok. The mind is so used to thinking that it can not just stop. You don't go from driving a car at 200mph to 0mph instantly. It has to keep on moving for a while before it can stop.

Yes, good.

If we want to use neuroscience, then there are pathways in the brain for certain ways of thinking, and those pathways don't die down instantly.

Now a few questions to make sure we're clear:

The closest I can get is that it's the end destination of all the senses. It not a something that is AT a certain location, but rather a location itself where everything that is seen, heard or smelled arrives. Therefore I call it an experiencer, who can not choose what and if to experience.

To have an experiencer and the experienced, there are at least two things, right? So where is the border between the experienceR and the experienceD?

When something that is seen or heard arrives at the location where everything is seen, when do they finish arriving? What do they become? Again, where are the borders?

Please answer these questions without going into thoughts. Only DE.

No, its shapeless, made of nothing. It is not like a tree that stands IN the park, but it's the park WHERE the trees stand. It is in an empty space where the senses arrive as they are sensed.

What is empty space without going into thoughts?

In direct experience, when do senses become separate from 'empty space'?

When answering all the above questions it feels a lot like me going to a park and trying to find it, but all I can find is trees, flowers, people, benches, roads. Then I get confused - if the objects 'are', then there must be a 'where' that they are at. If the senses arrive, then there must be something where they arrive at. But it's just a wordplay. It's not true. A tree can just stand be without a why, what and where. Senses can come without a 'where at' as well.

Yes :)

If you close your eyes, where is your foot? Without visualizing your body, which is a thought, where is your body?

Your analogy was great. There is no park, it is a concept. Now take it one step further: Is there a bench?

What is a bench? Wood, screws, and maybe something else, right? So is it also a concept?

Let me know what you find!

[NoSpoon]

Had a busy end of the week, but now everything is well and I will try to post everyday. Sorry about the delay.

To have an experiencer and the experienced, there are at least two things, right? So where is the border between the experienceR and the experienceD?

Direct experience is the border. The experiencer does not live in the realm of DE, it only lives in the world of the mind. The mind says there is an experiencer, but when you look for it in the real world (DE), it's not there. Meanwhile the experienced just keeps on coming without a pause. It's a never ending and ever changing flow. It funny how the saying 'to have the experiencer' seems normal to the mind, but when you say 'to have the experienced' the mind just can't compute it and stops.

When something that is seen or heard arrives at the location where everything is seen, when do they finish arriving? What do they become? Again, where are the borders?

If I just use DE, it's seems that the experiences never finish arriving and there is no location that it arrives at. The experiences (what is seen, heard etc) just keep on coming, like one long never ending movie. Thoughts come up saying that the start is when you are born and the end is when you die, but birth and death do not exist in this very moment (in the world of DE), so these thoughts are irrelevant.

What is empty space without going into thoughts?

Empty space is a thought, a concept and without thoughts it's just words.

In direct experience, when do senses become separate from 'empty space'?

When I sit in silence, it seems that they have always been separate. The senses can be found my smelling, seeing, hearing etc and empty space can not. However, I remember the answer to the previous question were I said that if we use DE only, 'empty space' is just words. I say these words out loud and now 'empty space' are no longer separate from the senses. The concept becomes words that can be heard.

If you close your eyes, where is your foot? Without visualizing your body, which is a thought, where is your body?

Your analogy was great. There is no park, it is a concept. Now take it one step further: Is there a bench?

What is a bench? Wood, screws, and maybe something else, right? So is it also a concept?If you close your eyes, where is your foot? Without visualizing your body, which is a thought, where is your body?

Your analogy was great. There is no park, it is a concept. Now take it one step further: Is there a bench?

What is a bench? Wood, screws, and maybe something else, right? So is it also a concept?

This part was fun and very new. When I can see my body, the mind labels what is sensed as a body. When I close my eyes and stop visualising, the mind starts labelling the same thing as energy. When eyes are opened I can point to the direction the visuals are coming from and the concept of direction is in play and when I close my eyes, the concept of direction disappears as I can not point to anything.

When I look at a bench in the park and ask if there is a bench or just screws, wooden planks etc, I realise that both answers are the same - whatever you call it, you are labelling the object as a whole or you are labelling different parts of the object. I lose interest in the process and want to concentrate on touching, smelling, seeing instead.
------
To summarize, I can really feel that something is changing. Yesterday I was walking home from a park after doing the exercise and was thinking about the difference between thoughts and DE. Suddenly, the thinking become very repulsive. I didn't want to do it anymore and it felt that I couldn't do it anymore even if I tried. It seemed so stupid and pointless to spend so much time in this world of thoughts that is just mimicking the real world and doing a terrible job as well. Thinking about real life objects and visualizing them in the head is just hollow, while by using DE, you can see the object way better than you can ever imagine it. Also, you can smell it, touch it, taste it. You can not do any of that by visualising it in your head. A simple room in the world of DE is a million times better than the most beautiful castle in the world of thought. This experience was very short, but it keeps on coming back since then quite often even if for a short stay.

Thank you!

[Bluejay]

Good looking. Good stuff :)

Now let's try this.

Hearing Exercise

Find somewhere quiet to sit. Rest for a moment and listen to the sounds in the room where you are, or sounds from outside.

Whatever it is, I'll just refer to it as 'what can be heard'.

1) In 'hearing' can anything be found other than 'what can be heard'?

2) Can what is doing the hearing be found? Or is there only 'what can be heard'?

3) An 'I'? a 'body'? A 'person'? A brain? A pair of ears? Can these be found doing the hearing? Or is there just 'what can be heard'?

What do you find?

Can an inherent hearer be found?

Would anything that is suggested as the hearer, be anything other than a concept, idea, or thought?

[NoSpoon]

1) In 'hearing' can anything be found other than 'what can be heard'?

No, you can only hear what can be heard. Maybe I misunderstood the question, because the answer is too obvious.

2) Can what is doing the hearing be found? Or is there only 'what can be heard'?

When I ask this question and look for an answer using DE, I can find thinking happening, which tries to convince me there's an 'I' doing the hearing, but when I stop analysing the thoughts and look for the actual 'I' through the senses only, I can not find it. In short, there is an illusion of 'the one who is doing the hearing', but it only lives in the context of the thoughts and can not be found through senses.

3) An 'I'? a 'body'? A 'person'? A brain? A pair of ears? Can these be found doing the hearing? Or is there just 'what can be heard'?

I think I answered this in question 2.

Would anything that is suggested as the hearer, be anything other than a concept, idea, or thought?

I think this was the problem all along. You can sense the thinking when you look through DE, so the brain uses this fact and tries to pretend that there is no difference between sensing the thinking and the context of the thinking. It's a very thin line at that point between going deeper and starting analysing your thoughts and zooming back out to using DE only. If/when I can do this easily, I'm sure the majority of my life will be lived in the physical world rather than the world of the mind. However, at this stage this requires a lot of effort as it must be done deliberately and can not be achieved reflexively. It seems to me that all these questions sound different, but they are the same in what they are trying to achieve. Essentially, answering all the questions go like this: You ask the question -> I look for answer via DE -> I sense vision, I sense hearing, I sense smells and then I sense thoughts -> I write an answer and most of the time my first answer is a product of thinking -> I read my answer and notice that -> I remove the parts that come from analysing the thoughts -> I click 'Submit'. Is there something that I'm missing? If not, then at this point it seems like all that is left for me is practice every day until the thinking eventually slows down.

What do you think?

Thanks!

[Bluejay]

You can sense the thinking when you look through DE, so the brain uses this fact and tries to pretend that there is no difference between sensing the thinking and the context of the thinking.

Exactly! Here we refer to this as Thought Arising and thought content.

You ask the question -> I look for answer via DE -> I sense vision, I sense hearing, I sense smells and then I sense thoughts -> I write an answer and most of the time my first answer is a product of thinking -> I read my answer and notice that -> I remove the parts that come from analysing the thoughts -> I click 'Submit'. Is there something that I'm missing? If not, then at this point it seems like all that is left for me is practice every day until the thinking eventually slows down.

This is correct.

The thinking is not the problem. Thinking that it is real is the problem. The self is a concept that isn't real. It's helpful in everyday life when talking to people. But it's detrimental if you think there is an inherent self. Then there is suffering.

So the thinking doesn't necessarily need to slow down. Over time, there will be less interest in unhelpful thoughts, which may or may not lead to fewer of those thoughts.

You probably meant that the identification slows down, but just making sure.

It's also good to beware of any expectations that smell a bit too good, for example: 'When I truly get this, I'll always be happy' and other thoughts that expect a future goal where everything is one way forever.

Earlier you mentioned that you still feel like there's something witnessing.

That may or may not have been seen through already, but let's have a look:

Seeing Exercise

The usual belief that 'I am this body' is usually tied in with the belief that the body as a separate item is responsible or 'doing' the senses - 'I see', 'I hear', 'I feel' and so on.

In this exercise, we'll focus on seeing.

So, close your eyes.

With eyes closed, you will now experience 'blackness'. There may be other things going on, but the specifics aren't important.

I'm going to keep things simple and use the term 'blackness' for whatever you can see while your eyes are closed.

1) With eyes closed, can you confirm that what is experienced is 'blackness' as I mentioned?

2) Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than 'blackness'?

3) Can what is witnessing the blackness be found?

4) Can a pair of eyes, an 'I' / 'me', a person be found that is witnessing the blackness? Or is there just 'blackness' to be found?

What do you find?

Can an inherent see-er be found?

Would anything that is suggested as the see-er, be anything other than a concept, idea, or thought?

[NoSpoon]

I would like to interrupt the question process, because I no longer see the purpose in the process and would like to clarify if there's something that I'm missing.

Thoughts happen automatically and we can not choose if and when the next thought will come or what content will it have. We also can not choose if the next thought will include the 'I', the 'thinker' or the 'doer'. The only way I see to influence the content of the thoughts is to give the brain more information. Let's say that for 10 years I believe in Santa and suddenly I see a video that it was my parents who put the gifts under the Christmas tree. The belief drops instantly. The same thing happened when I read the LU book and realised how the way language is constructed makes us believe that there is an 'I' who does, thinks, sees and hears. Once I have this information, I no longer believe that.

However, habits and thinking patterns are different from beliefs. We can analyse all the senses with the help of DE for many days, but what that does is only confirms that our old belief is false. However, it does not change the thinking patterns of our thoughts. Let's say I go to work and have a bad day making a big mistake in the process. Thoughts instantly come up blaming the thinker/doer who made the mistake. Other thoughts follow about how incompetent I am. Before I know it, I'm lost in thoughts about thoughts about thoughts. Suddenly my attention shifts to the concept that there is no doer who did the mistake, it happened on it's own, but before I realise it, I'm back to thinking about 'how I made a big discovery today and not how the discovery happened. And the lets call it 'circle' goes on and on.

At this point is there any benefit to even go through all these questions anymore? Is there a seer in seeing? No. Is there a hearer in hearing? No. Is there a doer in doing? No. The belief of the 'I' doing, seeing is hearing is dead. I know longer believe it, but the thinking patterns are the same and the circle continues.

Are these questions that you are sharing valuable at this point? Am I missing something? Is there a way to break out of the circle? Or is recognition of the circle the destination that you have been guiding me to?

Look forward to hearing from you.

Thanks!

[Bluejay]

However, habits and thinking patterns are different from beliefs. We can analyse all the senses with the help of DE for many days, but what that does is only confirms that our old belief is false. However, it does not change the thinking patterns of our thoughts. Let's say I go to work and have a bad day making a big mistake in the process. Thoughts instantly come up blaming the thinker/doer who made the mistake. Other thoughts follow about how incompetent I am. Before I know it, I'm lost in thoughts about thoughts about thoughts. Suddenly my attention shifts to the concept that there is no doer who did the mistake, it happened on it's own, but before I realise it, I'm back to thinking about 'how I made a big discovery today and not how the discovery happened.

There is a difference between intellectually understanding there is no inherent self, and experientially grokking it. The latter often comes in one or several shifts or a-ha moments, and that is often where changes happen.

This experiental clicking into place happens by looking until it clicks. It's rare that someone looks a few times and it's done.

Then there is also the flip-flopping after you've seen there is no inherent self, and you go in and out of old conditioning / thinking patterns as they unravel.

I've noticed a few of these potential experiental shifts from you. If you want, we can wrap up the questioning process with one question, and if that's good, then we can do the final questions, and we are done (assuming all goes well).

The question is: Can you say with 100% certainty that there is no separate self?

[NoSpoon]

The question is: Can you say with 100% certainty that there is no separate self?

That is a very good question. I can say 100% that there is no separate self in the physical world. BUT there is a separate self that lives in the mind as a concept, a thought pattern, an illusion. I go from being lost in thinking and living the life from the perspective of the separate self to suddenly snapping out of it (like waking from a dream) 100 times per day. Whether that counts as a yes or a no in regard of your question - I don't know.

Before signing up to this forum I viewed these shifts as a struggle which I wanted to break out from. To me that was a clear sign that something is still missing and I need help to find that something. Since then, I happened to read a book about neuroscience where it said that feeling struggle is a sign that your neuro system is forming new pathways (flip flopping in scientific terms?). Once the new pathway is formed it no longer comes with a feeling of struggle. To me it makes sense that this is what is happening to me right now. Also, I noticed that if I stop resisting and trying to break away from being lost in thoughts, nothing changes. I still keep shifting from being lost in thoughts to 'waking up' from them automatically. But then again, I don't trust my thoughts anymore and can't be sure.

It is not that I don't want to progress on this journey of waking up from the realm of constant thinking, but I'm just not sure if answering these questions is the way to go. It seems like all the questions point to the same answer - everything is just happening on it's own and there is not 'doer' behind anything. At this point that is clear to me already.

[Bluejay]

Also, I noticed that if I stop resisting and trying to break away from being lost in thoughts, nothing changes. I still keep shifting from being lost in thoughts to 'waking up' from them automatically. But then again, I don't trust my thoughts anymore and can't be sure.

It is not that I don't want to progress on this journey of waking up from the realm of constant thinking, but I'm just not sure if answering these questions is the way to go. It seems like all the questions point to the same answer - everything is just happening on it's own and there is not 'doer' behind anything. At this point that is clear to me already.

Those are good insights. It is happening by itself.

It is not that I don't want to progress on this journey of waking up from the realm of constant thinking, but I'm just not sure if answering these questions is the way to go. It seems like all the questions point to the same answer - everything is just happening on it's own and there is not 'doer' behind anything. At this point that is clear to me already.

Trust what resonates with you, like in the exercise we did about truth/lie, or body yes or no.

I'll post the final questions in the next post.

[Bluejay]

Here you go.

Please answer the questions individually, remembering to use the quote function.

All that is required is that you answer from your own experience, as best as you can.

Enjoy :)

1) Is there a separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form? Was there ever?

2) Explain in detail what the illusion of separate self is, when it starts and how it works from your own experience. Describe it fully as you see it now.

3) How does it feel to see this? What is the difference from before you started this dialogue? Please report from the past few days.

4) What was the last bit that pushed you over, made you look?

5) Describe decision & give examples from experience.

Describe intention & give examples from experience.

Describe free will & give examples from experience.

Describe choice & give examples from experience.

Describe control & give examples from experience.

What makes things happen? How does it work?

What are you responsible for? Give examples from experience.

6) Anything to add?

[NoSpoon]

Something happened yesterday. You asked if there is a SEPARATE self. Thoughts started about why do you use word 'separate' instead of just 'self'. Was typing something on the keyboard, looked at the fingers and a feeling of vertigo came. Then started noticing how eyes just jump from one object to another like they are out of control. Talked about that with my friend and she said that 'There is only one process and no subjects or objects'. Went to meditate and the whole body started pulsing with a very high frequency. And then the difference between seeing, hearing or touching was gone. All the sensations became one process that was happening so intensely that there was no longer space for anything else. Basically now it is clear that even when I wrote the post yesterday, I saw life as if it had two sides. One side from which the senses were coming and the other side to which the senses arrived. Now there's a feeling that without any doubt there is just one space without sides and all that is within that space is just one process. Feels a lot like tripping on mushrooms even though I'm completely sober.

1) Is there a separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form? Was there ever?

No.

2) Explain in detail what the illusion of separate self is, when it starts and how it works from your own experience. Describe it fully as you see it now.

The best way I can describe it without going into thinking (which I don't want to do at all) is that there is a gap between the source of sounds, visions, hearing and the destination where they arrive as they are experienced.

3) How does it feel to see this? What is the difference from before you started this dialogue? Please report from the past few days.

It feels like freedom. Everything is very intense and there's a lack of control which is not a bad thing, but in this case feels more like a reward. Even words (whether in a form of thoughts or speaking or me writing them here) feel not important and empty.

4) What was the last bit that pushed you over, made you look?

Answer in the intro of the post. Can't pinpoint to one thing, but the sequence of experiences.

5) Describe decision & give examples from experience.

There are no decisions, but impulses coming out of nowhere. The eyes just jump from one object to the other. Looks at the picture on my wall then back to the screen than back to the picture on my wall then to the thermos on my table then back to the screen. There's no point in looking at the same spot twice but it just happens and it's fine. Don't know why, don't care. :) Body does other stuff like typing on the keyboard, getting up and going to get some tea but it no longer feels like these are separate actions that require separate whys and separate decisions. It feels like one process just going and going without a reason or a why. The brain could explain it of course, but there's no need for that.

Describe intention & give examples from experience.

Impulse comes, body does. Intension is the word to describe the reason behind it. There is not always an intention. In fact, it feels like there is rarely a reason. Most of the actions happen without it. Or maybe it is just not always clear.

Describe free will & give examples from experience.

I used to think that free will means the ability for the decider to decide what happens. Now it seems that there is no decider and free will sounds more like it's free in terms of it doesn't belong to anyone and is not controlled by anyone. A will to do something just comes without a why. Just another word for impulse.

Describe choice & give examples from experience.

Describe control & give examples from experience.

Decision, control, choice, intention, free will - all just different words to describe the reason behind the actions of the decider. There is not decider, there is just one process, one flow, no why behind it.

What makes things happen? How does it work?

Things just happen. Nothing makes them to happen. The brain could write a book with a glorious story about how this works, but there is no reason or need for that.

What are you responsible for? Give examples from experience.

There is no 'me' that could be responsible for anything. Sounds, vision, thoughts, smells just happen. There is nothing else but one process. Brain creates all the different names and categories for this process, explains it, rates it, analyses it, allows it or resists it, but that's like blowing against the wind. The direction of the wind won't change. The same applies for the flow - it just happens regardless of what the brain thinks or wants.

6) Anything to add?
I don't know if this is what you were guiding me to or if you agree with the answers, but I don't care, because this moment feels like freedom and there is no urge to change anything. Thank you for being a part of the journey from the bottom of my heart!!

[Bluejay]

I don't know if this is what you were guiding me to or if you agree with the answers, but I don't care, because this moment feels like freedom and there is no urge to change anything. Thank you for being a part of the journey from the bottom of my heart!!

This is it, yes :)

It was great being your guide. Thank you.

Your answers will be shared with other guides who may have questions. Once that's done, you'll get information on groups that can help you with what comes after this, if that resonates with you.

I'll let you know!