The Gate

Hi Rali,
I figured out the issue with my reply notification. The little box below this text field that says "Notify me when a reply is posted" must have accidentally been unchecked. I will keep an eye on that.

When biting happens, what actually shows up?

As you described: the sweetness of the apple, the sound of the crunch, and the juiciness. Just hearing (sound), feeling (sensation), smelling (smell), and tasting (taste).

Clear?

Clear!

So if you look at the 'I/me' , is it actually known?
Yes, sensation labelled as “I” is known (as well as smell :), or sound), as are the thoughts ABOUT an “I”, but is an “I” actually known?

I understand there is no self or "I" here to know, only experiences/sensations taking place. I will sit with this more because this feels more like an understanding from past lectures rather than a lived "now" experience. When I close my eyes and see the darkness I feel this, but as soon as they are open the character Laura comes back to narrate.

Results of the exercise are below. It was a little more difficult than I anticipated due to my busy work day. I haven't had much time to be still. More importantly, I came across the issue of trying to record in my memory what was happening for this exercise so that annoying narrator kept showing up! However, I see the narrator is just labeling which feels like a win.

Here are the results:
Seeing espresso cup, simply = color (seeing)
Smelling coffee, simply = bouquet (smelling)
Feeling the warmth of the espresso cup, simply = sensation (feeling)
Tasting the coffee, simply = taste (tasting)
Hearing the espresso cup touch the desk surface, simply = sound (hearing)
Thought about drinking the coffee, simply = thought (thinking)

Seeing water from spout, simply = shapes/color (seeing)
Feeling the coolness of the water, simply = sensation (feeling)
Smelling nearby coffee machine, simply = smell (smelling)
Hearing water hit the sink, simply = sound (hearing)
Thought about cup, simply = thought (thinking)

Standing at my desk (not so easy to do this one):
Seeing an email, simply = colors/shapes (seeing)
Feeling the fan on my skin, simply = sensation (feeling)
Hearing the click of my mouse, simply = sound (hearing)
Thought about how to respond, simply = thinking (thought)

Sitting on the couch with my cat
Seeing HoneyBee = shape/color (seeing)
Feeling her fur, simply = sensation (feeling)
Smelling the fragrance of the clean cat litter, simply = smell (smelling)
Hearing the purring, simply = sound (hearing)
(I didn't lick her, so no taste!)

Best,
Laura

Hi Laura
Beautiful!

Seeing water from spout, simply = shapes/color (seeing)
Feeling the coolness of the water, simply = sensation (feeling)
Smelling nearby coffee machine, simply = smell (smelling)
Hearing water hit the sink, simply = sound (hearing)
Thought about cup, simply = thought (thinking)

Thank you for doing such wonderful looking! :) It is now to incorporate that looking into your everyday….make it a habit.
How does it feel to see what actually is? Maybe add a line (just seeing or hearing) to each of your answers, just to make it easier

It never stopped being this simple. Coffee, warmth, smell, sound. The narrator arrives after. The "Laura" appears only in hindsight. A name-tag slapped on sensation.
Look now:
Does the purring need a listener?
Does the warmth of the coffee need someone to feel it?
Does the espresso taste require an “I” to be tasted?
You know this already. Don’t hold it as a memory. Drop even the clarity.
Drop the dropping.
What’s left?

Now that you can look, let’s examine thinking and Laura’s narration more closely and thoroughly…
For the next exercise I want you to sit somewhere quiet and observe thoughts.
A thought appears.
In that moment is there anyone or anything which recognises the thought or is being aware of it?
Can you see anything that is separate from the thought and does the thinking?
Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear? Could you have done anything to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead? Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts?

Is there anything that is responsible for the thoughts like a traffic cop saying which one to go and which one to stay? Can the flow of thoughts be changed?
Where do thoughts appear from? Where are they coming from and going to? Do they appear randomly or in a structured way? Watch like a hawk.

Write down a sequence of 5 thoughts in the order that they appear. Now check:
Could you predict the order of their appearance?
Did you know which will be the second or the fourth?
Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle? How long does that last? Test it for the fun of exploration.
It seems that thought has some logical ordered appearance, but look carefully and just notice if there is an organised sequence. Or is it just another thought that says ‘these thoughts are in sequence’ or “they take content from previous thought”, or that "one thought follows another thought"?
Have you actually ever heard your thoughts? How is it known that thoughts have a voice, and that the voice is your voice (Laura’s)?
How is it known that thoughts appear in your head and become the ‘voice in Laura’s head’?
Have you ever been able to record thoughts as they spontaneously arise and then play them back in order to hear them, and to hear that they are in your voice?
So do thoughts actually have a sound? Or is the ‘voice in the head’ simply thoughts about sound?

Can thoughts be felt, smelled, tasted, heard or seen, or are they just known?
Are thoughts 100% true?
What are you, when you don't think about what you are?

Love
Rali

Hi Rali,
Thank you for your questions! I really appreciate your time.

How does it feel to see what actually is?

Spacious and gentle. For the brief moments of seeing I feel like my shoulders relax and the pressure of life is turned off momentarily. I feel a sense of ease surrounded by just what is.

Does the purring need a listener?
Does the warmth of the coffee need someone to feel it?
Does the espresso taste require an “I” to be tasted?

I was practicing this last night! My refrigerator was still making that whirring noise without me needing to hear it.
The coffee does not need me to feel it to be warm. There is no "I" here to taste the espresso so it is simply tasted.

In that moment is there anyone or anything which recognises the thought or is being aware of it?

I let go of labeling so it felt like it was happening without my person attached to it. I feel stumped about who/what recognizes that there is a whirring fridge noise or a warm mug. I suppose that is "awareness".

Can you see anything that is separate from the thought and does the thinking?

I cannot see anything that is separate from the thought and does the thinking.

Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear?

No. The thought appeared on its own.

Could you have done anything to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead? Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts?

This is amazing! No, there was no controlling the thought that appeared.
When I don't meditate my thoughts are generally less pleasant, but no...I can't seem to control those either.

Is there anything that is responsible for the thoughts like a traffic cop saying which one to go and which one to stay? Can the flow of thoughts be changed?

Again, I can be in a much more pleasant mood overall and have less negative thoughts when I meditate regularly but I can't control them whether they are pleasant or unpleasant at the moment they are appearing.

Where do thoughts appear from? Where are they coming from and going to? Do they appear randomly or in a structured way?

Ah, the ole "Where are my thoughts coming from" chestnut. They appear like clouds. They disappear like clouds. I watch thoughts in meditation daily and they just appear without structure. I will continue my hawk-like observance!

Could you predict the order of their appearance?

No, they appeared

Did you know which will be the second or the fourth?

No

Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing?

No

Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle? How long does that last?

I suppose I can't do that...seems impossible.

Or is it just another thought that says ‘these thoughts are in sequence’ or “they take content from previous thought”, or that "one thought follows another thought"?

. Some are attached to previous thoughts but then others T-bone right into the previous thought completely unrelated.

Have you actually ever heard your thoughts? How is it known that thoughts have a voice, and that the voice is your voice (Laura’s)?

My thoughts often have my voice. I hear my voice because it is quite an unrelenting narrator! However, hmmm... you got me. It seems like my thoughts may not actually have my voice all of the time. The voice sounds like my voice, or the voice that comes out of this body's vocal chords. I need to study this longer.

How is it known that thoughts appear in your head and become the ‘voice in Laura’s head’?

Gosh. The thoughts must be appearing in awareness but claimed by the character of Laura.

Have you ever been able to record thoughts as they spontaneously arise and then play them back in order to hear them, and to hear that they are in your voice?

No

So do thoughts actually have a sound?

No. Wow!

Or is the ‘voice in the head’ simply thoughts about sound?

Yes!

Can thoughts be felt, smelled, tasted, heard or seen, or are they just known?

Well, I get visions, like dreams that appear when I hear music or someone explains something to me. Perhaps that is just a knowing and not a thought but it feels like it happens at the same time.
Smells also come through as a smell before a thought. But I suppose the actual thought that comes through doesn't have an odor. Nor does it taste, as the taste comes before the thought.

Are thoughts 100% true?

I sure hope not. I had a bumper sticker that said "Don't believe everything you think."

What are you, when you don't think about what you are?

A sensation receptor. At work, a cog in the machine. At home, a vehicle of creative expression and a warm body for my cat to snuggle. I will sit with this further!

Thank you, Rali!
Laura

Hi Laura
It's working now :)

The coffee does not need me to feel it to be warm. There is no "I" here to taste the espresso so it is simply tasted.

I let go of labelling so it felt like it was happening without my person attached to it. I feel stumped about who/what recognizes that there is a whirring fridge noise or a warm mug. I suppose that is "awareness".

The thoughts must be appearing in awareness but claimed by the character of Laura.

Look, is it even “tasted” or just taste (tasting like a continuous flux)? When you hear the fridge—
Is there a you or any other entity (i.e. awareness) hearing it? Or is hearing/sound simply happening? Is there hearing and sound? Where does hearing stop and sound begin?
Let’s inquire into one of the senses…
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.

With eyes closed, can you confirm that what is experienced is 'blackness' as I mentioned?
Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than 'blackness'?
Can what is witnessing the blackness be found?
Can a pair of eyes/an 'I'/Laura/awareness/consciousness/SELF be found that is witnessing the blackness? Or is there just 'blackness' to be found?
Can an inherent see-er be found in any form or shape? Would anything that is suggested as the see-er, be anything other than a concept, idea, or thought?
Are there seer, seeing and the seen (as language/thought suggests) or just the seen? Can you have seeing without the seen, and the seen without the seeing?

When you say “awareness”, what is it? Is that seen or inferred (assumed)? Remember we are not trying to replace one set of beliefs with another (supposedly better), we are here to see, hear, taste, smell, feel what is actually here.
So describe it: Does is have a smell, a taste? Is it seen, heard or felt? How is it known that is there? How is it known that it is aware?
OR is “awareness” just a more subtle thought, an abstraction, an assumption—another label glued on top the undeniable fact of this raw, alive experience?
Where do you see the border that separates/demarcates awareness from the observed (DE)? Where does one end and the other (e.g. thought) begin?
Don’t hold to anything. Awareness is just the last refuge of the imaginary observer - the self is not dying but transforming itself into a fancier big (the biggest) SELF. It could be used as a stepping stone in teachings, but we are here just to observe what is real :)

Well, I get visions, like dreams that appear when I hear music or someone explains something to me. Perhaps that is just a knowing and not a thought but it feels like it happens at the same time.
Smells also come through as a smell before a thought. But I suppose the actual thought that comes through doesn't have an odour. Nor does it taste, as the taste comes before the thought.

Yes—exactly. Mental images, mental sounds, mental tastes appear but are they real?
Close your eyes and imagine holding a watermelon in your hands. Imagine it so vividly that you can feel its weight, the shape and texture of the skin. Hold it there, sensing it. Then open your eyes.
What happened to the melon?
How about the sensation that was so believable?
Was there ever a melon in ‘reality’?
Was there an appearing mental image?
Was the content of the mental image (the melon) ‘real’?
The thoughts and mental images are real only as DE of thoughts, their appearance cannot be denied. However their ‘contents’, what they are about (like the watermelon) are not ‘real’, they are just fantasies.
Can you see this?

Furthermore, all of it is trying to pin down what’s happening. Trying to assign a timing, a substance, a mechanism. As if any of this can be captured. But listen:
Smell doesn’t come before thought. Taste doesn’t follow thought. Don’t forget that even these are labels – DE labels but still labels. Labels are just pointers to experience (like fingers pointing to the moon) but not the experience itself. Like the icons on your desktop - they are used as a visual representation of what is actually a binary code – zeros and ones - so you can make use of them. But is the icon of email really a box with mail in it?
It just appears—unlabelled, untimed, unclaimed.
There’s no stream. No sequence. That’s the story thought lays on top.
So look again. Drop the commentary. Don’t name it “vision,” “knowing,” “smell,” or “taste.”
Let it all appear, without that layer.
What is here without that filter?
What happens when nothing is claimed, not even the timing of what appears?
Let go of even the need to say “what” appears.
Right now.
Look. Not as a someone. Not for an answer.
Just… this. Undivided. Undescribed. Not even “known.” I like the word “THIS” as it is more like a pointing word – pointing to whatever is directly experienced right now, like an arrow with no extra meaning – rather than labelling the experience.
Love
Rali

Thanks for the notifications via email, Rali. Much appreciated.

is it even “tasted” or just taste (tasting like a continuous flux)?

It seems that taste is much like the clouds that appear in the sky, it appears and then disappears like a thought. So, yes, it is taste appearing and disappearing.

When you hear the fridge—
Is there a you or any other entity (i.e. awareness) hearing it? Or is hearing/sound simply happening? Is there hearing and sound? Where does hearing stop and sound begin?

I discovered that hearing happens without an "I". Hearing stops when I let go of the "I" and becomes sound that happens without the "I" to hear it.

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

I hear my voice in my head asking the question 'what is experienced' and know that if I let that voice go it will be quiet.
What is left is the sound of birds, the sensation of breath in my nostrils, the sensations in my body and the awareness of these sounds/sensations.

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

I think I answered that above. The awareness of sensations in my body and the awareness that I am aware (what/how is that?).

Can what is witnessing the blackness be found?

Nothing to be found, just awareness.

Can a pair of eyes/an 'I'/Laura/awareness/consciousness/SELF be found that is witnessing the blackness? Or is there just 'blackness' to be found?

Ah, yes. Just blackness. Without the labeling.

Can an inherent see-er be found in any form or shape? Would anything that is suggested as the see-er, be anything other than a concept, idea, or thought?

A seer does not exist. Yikes. I need to go outside and see this...
Okay, the seer is labeling. Without labeling a seer does not exist. I have a sudden tightness in my throat at the same time as a minor sense of relief. Moving on...

Are there seer, seeing and the seen (as language/thought suggests) or just the seen? Can you have seeing without the seen, and the seen without the seeing?

You cannot have seeing without the seen, then it wouldn't be called "seeing." It would be smelling or sensing, etc. The seen also would be called something else so no. This is all logic but I also stepped outside and contemplated and came to the same conclusion.

When you say “awareness”, what is it? Is that seen or inferred (assumed)?

I am trying to be careful not to use memory or previous information but to really see it for myself. By awareness, I mean, stillness and quiet. The "is-ness" of the moment without labeling. It feels spacious and has a dream-like quality.

Does is have a smell, a taste? Is it seen, heard or felt? How is it known that is there? How is it known that it is aware?
OR is “awareness” just a more subtle thought, an abstraction, an assumption—another label glued on top the undeniable fact of this raw, alive experience?

Well, I'm quieting the mind and simply seeing without thought. The label "awareness" feels like someone else's idea but I don't know how to describe the lack of thought, the shapes and colors, the quiet mind, the feeling that everything exists without an "I" thinking about it. Though, perhaps that is even more subtle thought, like you suggest. I will continue to sit with this.

Where do you see the border that separates/demarcates awareness from the observed (DE)? Where does one end and the other (e.g. thought) begin?

I'm not finding a separation. I keep looking and I'm not coming up with anything.

are they real?

They are like dreams. So, no.

What happened to the melon?

It disappeared when the sense of seeing became stronger than the imagined image of the melon

How about the sensation that was so believable?

Only a memory is left

Was there ever a melon in ‘reality’?

There was not a melon in my hands only a thought of a melon

Was there an appearing mental image?

Yes

Was the content of the mental image (the melon) ‘real’?

The content of the image was not a real melon in my hands. Only a thought.

Can you see this?

Hah! How about that. Yes.

But is the icon of email really a box with mail in it?

No

What is here without that filter?

Existence. Sensory input. Awareness of the senses.

What happens when nothing is claimed, not even the timing of what appears?

The "is-ness" is left. As you say...'THIS'

When I paint a landscape or any object I try to look at them as shapes and colors without labels so that I can re-interpret them exactly how they are appearing; fresh. Its sort of like that. I also ponder what life is like if I was an animal, like a cat, deer, or skunk without a job or thoughts. It is also like a bit like that. Seeing without labeling. Or seeing something for the first time without relating it to a memory or having a need to call it something. Just experiencing and moving on.
I am hoping to explain what is happening for me so that we can see if I am on the right track.

I am going to sit with this throughout the day and see if it changes or becomes more clear as a non-experience, not as a someone and not for an answer.

I feel like I hit the non-duality instructor lottery jack-pot. Thank you so much.
With gratitude,
Laura

Hi Laura,
Read this again—slowly:

Well, I'm quieting the mind and simply seeing without thought. The label ‘awareness’ feels like someone else's idea but I don't know how to describe the lack of thought, the shapes and colors, the quiet mind, the feeling that everything exists without an ‘I’ thinking about it. Though, perhaps that is even more subtle thought, like you suggest. I will continue to sit with this.

That is it. Not something else. Not “more.” That inability to pin it down, that felt immediacy before naming—is-ness/thus-ness—not known by anyone, not seen from anywhere, not grasped by anything.
That isn’t “awareness” as an entity. It isn’t a thing. It’s not an atmosphere. It’s not a field. It’s not a witness. It’s just not-two. Just THIS.
Now notice:

...the quiet mind, the feeling that everything exists without an ‘I’ thinking about it.

What is here without that filter?

Existence. Sensory input. Awareness of the senses.

Can what is witnessing the blackness be found?

Nothing to be found, just awareness.

Just awareness or just blackness??? Do you see awareness or blackness?
A subtle idea remains. The idea that “something” exists without an “I.” That “awareness” knows it. That something is “aware of it.”
But what if there is no such thing as awareness at all? No awareness of the senses but just the senses.
Just seeing, just sound, just thought, just sensation—not to someone, not for anyone. Never known by anything. Just what appears.
What happens right now if you drop even the idea of awareness?
Is there anything left out?
Who’s left to know this moment?
Where is the distance between what is happening… and the one it’s supposedly happening to?
Is there even existence?
No existence at all—outside this immediate, raw, inconceivable appearing.
You don’t need to say “existence” when there’s just this.
Not something existing. Not something appearing to someone.
Just this, without label, without edge, without meaning.
Look again. See it
Right now.
Where is the one who says “this exists”? Thought? Because they are right about everything else??
Where is the thing that is?
Or is that just thought claiming what never had form to begin with?
Strip the word. Strip the “existence.”
What’s left?
Love
Rali

Hi Rali,
Thank you!

Do you see awareness or blackness?

blackness

But what if there is no such thing as awareness at all?

Then it is THIS. Just THIS.

What happens right now if you drop even the idea of awareness?

Then it is just THIS.

Is there anything left out?

This does not compute. I'm not sure what you mean here. I close my eyes and it is just hearing, sensations in the body. I open my eyes and seeing is happening.

Who’s left to know this moment?

There is no "I" here to know.

Where is the distance between what is happening… and the one it’s supposedly happening to?

Happening happens. No distance.

Is there even existence?

I don't even know what that word means any more because there is only THIS

Where is the one who says “this exists”? Thought? Because they are right about everything else??

Only a thought. Hah.

Where is the thing that is?

Ya got me.

Or is that just thought claiming what never had form to begin with?

That seems to be the case.

What’s left?

THIS

(Insert wide-eyed emoji)
Well, that was fun.

Thank you, Rali.

Much gratitude.
Laura

Hi Laura
Yes! That’s it.
THIS—with nothing on top. No seer. No seen. No “this.” No awareness. No blackness. No knower of any kind.
Just…
what already is, before the idea that anything is.
Thought will still narrate. Still try to rebuild a perch to stand on. Still claim subtle ground—like “presence,” or “that spaciousness,” or “just this.” Let it try.
But don’t let it land. Because no thought has ever seen this.
And no “you” ever will.

This does not compute. I'm not sure what you mean here. I close my eyes and it is just hearing, sensations in the body. I open my eyes and seeing is happening.

Is seeing not happening with eyes closed as well? Is "blackness" not seeing? That's thought specialty - certain colours are things and others are nothingness

There is no "I" here to know.

Is there anything to be known without the labels and artificial separation in the first place?
It's like looking at a lava lamp. The wax may seem to change shape, and the shapes it seems to take may seem to be present one moment, and absent the next. But all that is known is the wax. Nothing actually changed and nothing was ever born or lost, although it may have seemed to. All that is known is experience/just this - nothing can be added to it, nor taken away.

Let’s explore the “body” a bit more…
1. Take something cold from the fridge – like a can of cooldrink. When you touch the can, what does more accurately describe your experience:
a. Your fingers feeling cold because of touching a cold can; or
b. Coldness - sensation labelled “cold”? With eyes closed, where does the cold appear?
Observe the order in which the details appear
2. 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?
Is there an inside or an outside (i.e. with eyes opened)? If there is an inside - the inside of what exactly? If there is an outside - the outside of what exactly? A body here and a world outhere?
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

Hi Rali,
Thanks so much.
Yes, it only takes a nanosecond for the labelling and thoughts to start up again. I am trying to stretch that and not "let it land" as you suggest. I am right with you while I am reading and responding to these emails. No thought has ever "seen" this...
and there is no "I" here to ever see it. I get it.

Is seeing not happening with eyes closed as well? Is "blackness" not seeing?

There is blackness, yes. Blackness is seen

Is there anything to be known without the labels and artificial separation in the first place?

Nothing to be known since there is no separation.

a. Your fingers feeling cold because of touching a cold can; or

There is a sensation of coldness in the field

b. Coldness - sensation labelled “cold”? With eyes closed, where does the cold appear?

It appears to be in the field along with everything else.

Can it be known how tall the body is?

No

Does the body have a weight or volume?

No

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

No

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?

There is only sensation. I wouldn't know it was a chair (as opposed to a rock, for example). It is simply pressure and tingling.

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

Since there is no "I" it is just a body

Is there an inside or an outside (i.e. with eyes opened)? If there is an inside - the inside of what exactly? If there is an outside - the outside of what exactly? A body here and a world outhere?

Well, I suppose we measure inside versus outside by the boundary of the body's skin. Inside the skin and outside the skin.
Sensations are coming "in" through the eyes, ears, etc. but since there is no distance then it must be all one thing without inside or outside.

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

Sensations and thoughts.

Can the 'body' do things?

I did my dishes, went for a hike, and sat by a little stream in the woods before coming to the following conclusion:
There are sensations in a field and we call that a body. Today, it seems that the body is just a thought so it cannot 'do' anything of its own volition. A thought cannot 'do' anything. It seems the body also is part of the happening THIS Is-ness.
But, if "I" am just a thought, and my body (including my brain/mind) is just a thought...who/what is the thinker? Why are they called thoughts? Is that a concession?

This was as far as I could get.

With gratitude,
Laura

Hi Laura
Beautiful, Laura. You're already dismantling it.

There is a sensation of coldness in the field

It appears to be in the field along with everything else.

Is the sensation cold itself or “coldness” is just a conditioned description of it? Is there a field that the sensation appears in? OR there is only the sensation/feeling in progress?

Sensations are coming "in" through the eyes, ears, etc. but since there is no distance then it must be all one thing without inside or outside.

Well, I suppose we measure inside versus outside by the boundary of the body's skin. Inside the skin and outside the skin.

Are you using eyes right now to see this? Or is this just... appearing?
Is there any evidence—in direct experience—that anything is traveling from “out there” to “in here”? Where is the border where the image crosses over from being outside to being inside of you? What does the border consist of?

Where is the skin—right now?
Not the thought "this is my skin". Not the image. Not the idea.
But the actual experience of this boundary—directly, now. Think “cup of coffee example” of breaking down activities. What would touching skin equate to? What would seeing skin equate to in real DE?
Can skin be found?
Can you touch it without the thought “skin”?
Can you locate “inside” without first assuming there is something called “outside”?
Or are both “inside” and “outside” just mental coordinates stamped onto this, to create the illusion of containment?
Where does sensation end and the world begin?
Where is the line?

Isn’t that entire model—a body with senses, receiving data from a world—just a thought overlay?
Drop that model. Drop the assumption.
Isn’t it just this?
This... already showing.
No need for a body. No need for skin. No need for eyes. No viewer. No distance.
Only what appears, without source, without location, without a seer.
Can you find anything else—right now—outside of what’s appearing?
Don’t answer. Stay with it. Let the model collapse.

LOOK.
Isn’t this whole “field”—sound, colour, pressure, taste, movement—just one seamless, edgeless flux?
So tell me:
Where is the “you” that’s inside? Where is the refence point for here and there?
And where is the anything that’s outside?
Don’t reach for ideas. Drop every map.
Is there anything here not already included in this?

There are sensations in a field and we call that a body. Today, it seems that the body is just a thought so it cannot 'do' anything of its own volition. A thought cannot 'do' anything. It seems the body also is part of the happening THIS Is-ness.

Exactly! Body is just a label pointing to sensations and colours

If ‘I’ am just a thought, and the body (including brain/mind) is just a thought... who/what is the thinker?

you were already caught back in the loop.
Why?
Because “thought” isn’t a thing. It’s not an object. It doesn’t need a thinker.
Just like sound doesn’t need a “hearer,” and sensation doesn’t need a “feeler.”
A thought is just happening. No one thinks it.

Why are they called thoughts? Is that a concession?

Yes. The label “thought” is itself just another thought. Another happening. Another arising in the "field". And that’s the collapse:
No thinker. No seer. No center.
Not even a field—that too is imagined.
Only this.
Not sensation in the field. Not awareness of sensation.
Just… sensation.
Blackness. Warmth. Birdsong.
And no one here to know it.
Now look again:
Where is the gap between the “experience” and the “experiencer”?
Where does “experience” end, and “you” begin?
Drop the question.
Let the thought come… and don’t let it land. Don’t try to solve it.
Just stay with the raw appearance, until there’s no one left to ask why.
THIS is already it.
Still. Silent. Selfless.
Love
Rali

Hi Rali,
I'll dive right in:

Is the sensation cold itself or “coldness” is just a conditioned description of it? Is there a field that the sensation appears in? OR there is only the sensation/feeling in progress?

Yes, there is sensation in progress. It is a direct experience without anything I labeled as "field."

Are you using eyes right now to see this? Or is this just... appearing?

There is no "I" so the eyeballs are also just thoughts. I am (the body is) not "doing" as I recently discovered. It is just happening. Appearing.

Is there any evidence—in direct experience—that anything is traveling from “out there” to “in here”?

I see nothing traveling. Since there is no distance it all seems to be one thing.

Where is the border where the image crosses over from being outside to being inside of you? What does the border consist of?

Hah. I don't see any border.

Where is the skin—right now?

Skin is part of everything else. In fact, what skin? I think it may have disappeared.

What would touching skin equate to? What would seeing skin equate to in real DE?

Sensation in progress, perhaps a contraction of energy.

Can skin be found?

Not any longer.

Can you touch it without the thought “skin”?

I can touch it and feel the sensation without using the word skin. It could be just a contraction of energy or a thought of a contraction of energy

Can you locate “inside” without first assuming there is something called “outside”?

no

Or are both “inside” and “outside” just mental coordinates stamped onto this, to create the illusion of containment?

Yes, there is no inside and outside

Where does sensation end and the world begin?

Listening to a train in the distance and the train and my hearing are all part of one thing. Touching my skin I feel no borders and it is all one thing.

Where is the line?

There is no line

Isn’t that entire model—a body with senses, receiving data from a world—just a thought overlay?

It seems that is the case.

Isn’t that entire model—a body with senses, receiving data from a world—just a thought overlay?

If there were no body there would be no sensations. Is sensation a thought... Yes I discovered recently that sensations were thoughts that come and go.

Can you find anything else—right now—outside of what’s appearing?

No

Isn’t this whole “field”—sound, colour, pressure, taste, movement—just one seamless, edgeless flux?

Yes, it feels right to say it is a "happening that is happening"

Where is the “you” that’s inside? Where is the refence point for here and there?

There is no me inside. There seems to be no borders to here and there

And where is the anything that’s outside?

Its all one thing that is happening

Is there anything here not already included in this?

Nope!

Where is the gap between the “experience” and the “experiencer”?

No gap, the experiencer is the experience

Where does “experience” end, and “you” begin?

All ...is "happening" without separation.

Let the thought come… and don’t let it land. Don’t try to solve it.
Just stay with the raw appearance, until there’s no one left to ask why.

In the previous question there appeared a strong sensation in my throat and heaviness in my chest with tears in my eyes, but I can't identify the feeling. Perhaps it was sadness perhaps it was joy. I don't know and I'm not sure its important here. My phone rang and thinking came back (I'm on the clock), so I will sit with this the rest of the day. Or I should say, the experience will continue to unfold as it does.

With much gratitude, always,
Laura

Hi Laura

Perfect!

There is no "I" so the eyeballs are also just thoughts. I am (the body is) not "doing" as I recently discovered. It is just happening. Appearing.

That sounds like a logical conclusion – there is no this so therefore no that. Just look! Is seeing coming from the eyes or not? There is seeing “with eyes closed” (“blackness”) and “with eyes opened” (“the world”). So are the eyes doing the seeing?

Sensations were thoughts that come and go.

Is sensation a thought... Yes I discovered recently that sensations were thoughts that come and go.

Sensation in progress, perhaps a contraction of energy.

Yes in a way. I think I get what you are saying here but just to make sure…We use DE labels (sensations, colours, sounds, tastes, smells, and thoughts) as pointers to aspects of DE – to talk about it, share information. In reality there are no such things as thoughts and sensations, or tastes, or colours, or sounds, or smells. Just this – indivisible and indescribable. Even thoughts are DE (not what they talk about - that is fiction - but their presence)

To call sensations “a contraction of energy” is just another label, a more detailed description – it’s not better or more accurate, because it still doesn’t capture the real nature nor the richness of DE. What is energy in DE? How is energy different from a sensation in DE – not as meaning but as DE?
We suggest the DE labels for clarity of correspondence, also a lot of people read the threads so it’s good to have “terminology” that everyone gets :)
So check…
Where does “sensation” end and “thought” begin—in direct experience, not in memory?
Can you find a dividing line?
Close your eyes and listen to a sound. Thought says it’s that and that (e.g. bird song), but check is there an actual bird in the raw sound or that is added by thought? Now check…Does the sound appear in a different “place” to thoughts? Can you find an actual line/wall/boundary/channel that divides the thoughts and the sound? Or is the line a mental construct?
Now open your eyes and notice colours. Do the colours appear in a different “place” to thoughts and sounds? Can you find an actual line/wall/boundary/channel that divides thoughts, sounds and colours, or is that division a mental construct?

Is there a raw flux plus a separate mental overlay (on top of the flux)?
Or just this—undivided?
Look right now:
Is there really sensation plus thought plus awareness?
Or is that "exists" only as thought description?
Just look.

If there were no body there would be no sensations.

How is it known that the body is required to have sensations? The “body” is a label/thought pointing to/describing sensations/feeling ( aka “energy”, “pulsation”, “vibration”) ( e.g. “heartbeat”, “breathing”, “itchiness”, “tightness”, “expansion”), colours/seeing (e.g. “skin”, “arms”, “legs”), smells/smelling (e.g."body odor", "sweat"). Is thought necessary for sensations to appear? Or colours? Or smells) Just because these – colours and sensations – have always appeared together is not a reason to establish cause and effect. That would be an assumption, right?

In the previous question there appeared a strong sensation in my throat and heaviness in my chest with tears in my eyes, but I can't identify the feeling. Perhaps it was sadness perhaps it was joy. I don't know and I'm not sure its important here. My phone rang and thinking came back (I'm on the clock), so I will sit with this the rest of the day. Or I should say, the experience will continue to unfold as it does.

It's a good time to explore emotions...
Emotion = thought + sensation

So check … Does a sensation labelled "sadness" have any inherent sadness in it? OR just a raw sensation + thought about sadness/joy? How is that sensation different from the sensation “wriggling my toes"? Does that sensation contain any toes? How are they different? Maybe different intensity but besides that what makes the one sadness and the other toes? OR are they both just indescribable (though experientable) this? What is there without the story of sadness or joy?

Love
Rali

Hi Rali,
I've been having a bit of a tough time with seeing/sight and feeling frustrated, but maybe I turned a corner. I had to go through this a few times to really drop in. I'm taking off for a trip in a few hours so I feel pre-occupied with lists and deadlines today. I may not be able to respond while I'm traveling but I will try to use my mobile phone. If not, I will be back home to my laptop on the 13th.

Is seeing coming from the eyes or not? There is seeing “with eyes closed” (“blackness”) and “with eyes opened” (“the world”). So are the eyes doing the seeing?

This one is difficult for me. I see blackness and shapes from the photon receptor cells/rods and cones. Ah, yes, but what is blackness and how can I "see" that. hmmmm I will ponder.

What is energy in DE? How is energy different from a sensation in DE – not as meaning but as DE?

That is simply a concept. I understand.

Where does “sensation” end and “thought” begin—in direct experience, not in memory?
Can you find a dividing line?

I see this. Sensation is a DE and thought ABOUT the sound follows. Though I understand thought itself is also a DE. When I hear birdsong I do not need to label it, I can hear it as just a DE sound.

is there an actual bird in the raw sound or that is added by thought?

raw sound with the thought "bird"

Now check…Does the sound appear in a different “place” to thoughts?

No, no problem with that one. Same place

Can you find an actual line/wall/boundary/channel that divides the thoughts and the sound? Or is the line a mental construct?

I find no boundary. Sound and thought appear in the same place.

Do the colours appear in a different “place” to thoughts and sounds?

I found this one challenging and it took me a while to get here. It is all appearing in the same 'place' though the word 'place' is the same as 'field' which only points in a direction that is always here.

Can you find an actual line/wall/boundary/channel that divides thoughts, sounds and colours, or is that division a mental construct?

. I can find no boundary.

Is there a raw flux plus a separate mental overlay (on top of the flux)?
Or just this—undivided?

Just this. Undivided.

Is there really sensation plus thought plus awareness?
Or is that "exists" only as thought description?

It is all happening here.

How is it known that the body is required to have sensations?

Because that is what I have been taught since I was a child.

Is thought necessary for sensations to appear? Or colours? Or smells)

No

That would be an assumption, right?

Yes

Does a sensation labelled "sadness" have any inherent sadness in it?

Nope. (This part comes easily to me)

OR just a raw sensation + thought about sadness/joy? How is that sensation different from the sensation “wriggling my toes"?

Raw sensation. No different

Does that sensation contain any toes? How are they different?

No toes, no difference

OR are they both just indescribable (though experientable) this?

they seem the same to me, appearing HERE

What is there without the story of sadness or joy?

A sensation HERE

Thank you, Rali.
Much appreciation.
Laura

Hi Laura

I may not be able to respond while I'm traveling but I will try to use my mobile phone. If not, I will be back home to my laptop on the 13th.

Thanks so much for letting me know! Enjoy your travel!

It's my pleasure guiding you!
Every line, every pointer, every reply you gave—clear, direct, alive.
No boundary. No separate place for sound, thought, colour, feeling.
No toes in the sensation. No sadness in the ache.
No awareness outside the flux. No flux apart from this.
Not even “this” is separate from what’s appearing now.

I see blackness and shapes from the photon receptor cells/rods and cones. Ah, yes, but what is blackness and how can I "see" that. hmmmm I will ponder.

When the eyes are closed—what exactly is doing the seeing?
Can you find any distance between the blackness… and what’s seeing it? Can you see the eyes seeing? :) How? With what? More eyes?
Isn’t that distance imagined?
Photon receptor cells/rods and cones … Where are those—in direct experience?
Are you seeing them? Tasting them? Touching them? Hearing them?
Or… are they just thoughts—concepts taught and repeated?
Are they appearing now—or are they an idea about now?
When looking at the world…
do you see “light bouncing off objects and striking rods and cones”?
Or do you just see… this? Raw colour. No distance. No cause. No photons. No cells. No retina. No body. Just seeing.
Seeing doesn’t say: “This is the result of visual cortex processing optic signals.”
Only thought says that. And thought is not experience.
So look:
Where are the rods and cones now? Without imagining—can they be found?
Can you find the process? Or is this just already appearing—with no explanation?
Let go of the story. Let go of the science. Let go of the learned model. We agreed on that in the beginning. Having a beginner’s mind about this inquiry. “Learning” from scratch
What’s actually here?
Are the eyes seeing the world? Or is seeing simply happening?
Drop the story of blindness and damaged eyes! Right now: are you seeing through eyes—or just seeing?
No instruments needed. No middleman. No camera. No lens. Just seeing.
No direction, no distance, no inside looking out. Just this.
Let that land. Then ask:
Where is the seer?
And when no answer comes…
Stay there. No label. No filter. No one left to see. Only this.

Seeing doesn’t come from eyes.
Hearing doesn’t come from ears.
Sadness doesn’t come from thoughts.
There’s no source. No container. Just this, uncontained.
Furthermore, we don’t experience our senses individually. Rather, these are different aspects of experience. Thought tells us that our senses are separate streams of information. We see with our eyes, hear with our ears, feel with our skin, smell with our nose, taste with our tongue. In DE, though, it is seen as one experience. Senses affect each other.
Although speech is perceived through the ears, what we see can change what we hear. In this video, a man produces the same syllable over and over again. If you watch his mouth, you’ll hear the syllable “fah,” but if you look away, you’ll hear “bah.” Although your ears hear “bah,” your eyes see “fah”. This phenomenon is known as the McGurk effect. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k8fHR9jKVM )

Another example of sensory interaction is how both taste and smell are vital for savouring food (flavour). If smell is lost or impaired, for instance, the taste of food will also be impaired, even if taste receptors on the tongue are working fine.
Here is a fun video that demonstrates how a relationship between sight and touch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DphlhmtGRqI
Even though it might look as there are clearly defined senses, DE shows a different story. So even the senses are dependently originated which makes them also empty of inherent existence.

Though the word ‘place’ is the same as ‘field’ which only points in a direction that is always here.

That’s it. When sensation, thought, sound, colour—all appear in the same no-place, inseparable —
Then what could be divided? What could be claimed? What could be owned?
“Field” splits this into experience and a medium, a vague container—some subtle “thing” that sensations, thoughts, sounds are in. It’s like saying: “Yes, there’s no one here… but something is holding this all together.” Like a screen where something is popping on and off (1's and 0's). But we saw that even no seeing is still seeing (blackness), no hearing is still hearing (silence). All of that appearance disappearance is created by ... labels. So is the container needed for something to be always here - in differnent intensity but still here?
Where is the field? Can it be seen? Touched? Felt?
Or is it just another idea—a label glued over what’s actually showing up?
Can you find any border that separates the field from what appears “in” it?
Or is the field just another word for experience, used when thought wants to sound deep?

Thought, colour, sound aren’t in the same “place”—
They are not two. Not even one.
No “they” at all until thought splits this into pieces:
“Sensation here.” “Colour there.” “Sound over there.”
“A me in here” “A world out there”
But in raw experience—before carving it up—
Where is the line?
Is there colour plus seeing?
Sound plus hearing?
Sensation plus feeler?
Or just seamless “experience” - undivided, label-less, boundary-less, self-less?
Thought rushes in like a butcher: cuts, names, claims, owns, explains. But nothing needs carving. No separation ever happened. Only this seamless flux—that no one is outside of (appears to no one), and is not contained into anything. It just … IS
Even further…
Who says this is “experience”?
Where is that claim coming from?
Without naming, measuring, comparing—
What is this?
Love
Rali

Hey Laura
Are we still doing this?

Love
Rali