Discovery

[Anastacia42]

Good.

Throughout all of these pointers notice how it FEELS to look directly this way.


Mind Labeling Experience

Here is an exercise which examines the way in which the mind labels experience - it takes about 20 minutes and you will need a pen a paper.

This exercise is broken into 10 minute lots. For each 10 minute period pay attention to any bodily sensation i.e. is there any tightening, or any relaxing?

For the first ten minutes write down what you are experiencing right now using the word “I”.

For example:

I am sitting on a chair,
I am hearing a clock ticking,
I am looking at a computer screen,
I am feeling hungry.

Get right to the point, no past or future fantasy, just a plain description of your experience right here and now.

Then for the next ten minutes continue writing down what you are experiencing but this time without using the word “I”. Just describe the experience as it is happening using verbs.

For example:

Sitting on a chair,
typing,
breathing,
blinking,
hearing the clock.

(Again, watch what is happening in the body.)

At the end of the twenty minutes compare the two ways in which the experience was labelled and answer the following four questions:

1. Is one truer than the other, and If so, which one?

2. What is here without labels?

3. Do labels affect the experience or just describe it?

4. Did you notice any differences in the body?

Loving

[Swift]

.

Is one truer than the other, and If so, which one?

2. What is here without labels?

3. Do labels affect the experience or just describe it?

4. Did you notice any differences in the body?

1 yes thinking without the I seemed like a truer description of what was actually happening
2 it seems like without the labels there is only experience
3 the I label made it feel more like I was taking ownership of an experience
4 I felt a bit more relaxed and a lot more aware of what was actually going on around me

I found it more effective for me if I removed any idea of subject at all so not breathing but breath is being taken not pouring kettle but kettle is being poured I found this made me even more aware of the experience

[Anastacia42]

Good morning,

Yes, it's truer with no "I "

found it more effective for me if I removed any idea of subject at all so not breathing but breath is being taken not pouring kettle but kettle is being poured

That's okay. Along as the "-ing" remains, because there is a flow of happening. Good.

Let's bring it together:


Actual/Direct Experience - Apple

Have a look at an apple (or any fruit you like.) If you have a ‘real’ apple, you can use it for this exercise. Google for a picture of an apple.



When looking at an apple, there's color; a thought saying ‘apple’; and maybe a thought saying, "I'm looking at an apple."

What is known for sure? Color is known and thoughts are known.

What about the content of thoughts, what they describe?

Actual experience does not refer to thoughts ABOUT something…because that is only just more thought.

Actual experience is sound, thought, color, smell, taste, sensation and the fact of thought arising, but not its content.

Is there really an ‘apple’ here, or only color and a thought ABOUT ‘apple’?

Can ‘apple’ be found in actual experience?

While these thoughts are known, what they talk ABOUT can't be found in actual experience.

This is what is meant by "looking in actual experience." What you know for sure, and, is always here.

Taste labeled ‘apple’ is known
Color labeled ‘apple’ is known
Sensation labeled ‘apple’ is known (when apple is touched)
Smell labeled ‘apple’ is known
Thought about/of an ‘apple’ is known

However, is an apple actually known?

Have fun and let me know what you find out.

Loving,

[Swift]

Is there really an ‘apple’ here, or only color and a thought ABOUT ‘apple’?

Can ‘apple’ be found in actual experience?

I found this very difficult
I feel that I know an apple from experience
an apple can be red green yellow, a red apple may look purple in the dark light or more yellow in a bright light. so I feel that I know the Apple from experience
if I taste an apple I may say it is sharp but if I eat it after a grapefruit it will taste sweet so even though there is no real knowing of the Colour or the taste in terms of labeling and I can't define an apple I still feel that I know it from experience
isn't relying on experience relying on thoughts about the past?

can I just thank you for taking the time to do this I do really appreciate it

[Anastacia42]

Hi,

You are welcome.

Okay, take what you have learned as our definitions of Direct Experience. Colored Socks exercise is your guide. We want you LOOKING here and now, not remembering, not thinking in any form. Go back to Colored Socks, you'll find:

Direct or Actual Experience is

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

Did you see "The Matrix?" This shows up there, too. There is no "spoon." We made up the label. There is no "apple." That is completely made up. If you were an infant and not yet talking and no one had told you, "That is an 'apple,'" what would you have? A color that you could not name and a shape you could not name.

You would have just the plain experience of something with no language at all.

Now, since you and I need to communicate here, we have pared it down as much as we can. Yes, all of the 5 senses are labels, but it's the best we could do. If you LOOK and don't *think* you will be catapulted into this baby-like clear awareness. That is how we see there is no "self," which is equally as made up as "apple."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ph02o6K2aoo

Or spoon.

So, take another look from Direct Experience only, like you did in the exercise before.

Your answers don't matter so much as your LOOKING, your own becoming present to the . . . unnamed . . . . here and now.

Loving,

[Swift]

When I examine an apple

I feel texture and solidity
I have thought about the Apple
I experienced a smell
I see a color and a shape
I can bite the apple and I hear sound and feel resistance against my teeth
there is a taste

[Anastacia42]

Good! That is the idea.

Now. . . does all of that mean there is really an "apple?" Or did we make that up?

Loving,

[Swift]

Yes I think that even though we may have made labels and thoughts and Expectations for it, an apple does still exist independent of those things

[Anastacia42]

There's no "apple" until it is labeled. Let's move on & look at some other things. Maybe come back to this. Maybe not.

Here is another exercise that makes it even clearer that labels are not the things they refer to. They are merely the content of thought that we made up.

Label-Reality Correlation

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

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

Is the red color "experienced" or is color green "experienced" as the label suggests?

Do the labels have a one-to-one correspondence with "reality?"

Or do the labels suggest something else other than what is here now (red color)?

Is green-ness an inherent attribute of the "experience" of the red color; or is green just a word label on the experience of the red color?

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

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

Check. Go through this carefully.

Loving,

[Swift]

Is green-ness an inherent attribute of the "experience" of the red color; or is green just a word label on the experience of the red color?

This really confused me
I could not understand what the question above meant at all

[Swift]

I tried to think about this in other terms
hundreds of years ago we didn't have a word for molecule and just because we then named something as a molecule it didn't suddenly bring it into existence, it just meant that we had decided to describe it
is that similar to what you mean?

[Anastacia42]

Yes. very much like that.

Let's look at this & please answer all of the questions.

Is green-ness an inherent attribute of the "experience" of the red color; or is green just a word label on the experience of the red color?

I'm very surprised this is confusing.

is green just a word label on the experience of the red color?

Read that part of the question. LOOK at the word that is given GREEN.

You are what us called in psychology "language bound." In other words, you believe the words me than smart your eyes are SEEING.

You will have to overcome that & learn to believe your eyes in order to SEE that there's no "self." "Self" and "apple" are just word labels added to the reality of a thing.

This is all about LOOKING and ignoring thinking & labels & stories we've been taught since we were born. ANYTHING that someone had to teach you that you cannot SEE with your own eyes is completely made up.

I'm going to let you contemplate all of that & my signature quote from Adyashanti for a bit.

It's okay to be confused for a while.

Loving ,

[Anastacia42]

Sorry I missed some typos...

In other words, you believe the words me than smart your eyes are SEEING.

should be

In other words, you believe the words more than smart your eyes are SEEING.

Thanks,

[Anastacia42]

more than WHAT you're eyes are seeing.

[Swift]

I understand what you are saying that the redness of the text is in no way affected by the label it is given.
I appreciate that the red or good or bad in no way effect the redness of the label , I just really did struggle in that I just didn't understand the language used in that sentence so I thought I was missing something, but I do totally understand the concept - I initially looked and thought green and I've had to read it several times to realise that yes I'm actually looking at red despite what label it is given