My humble and sober request for a guide...

[Dimitri]

True! Black isn't subtle at all. It's just very black. There is still view here, just not the light filled view I've come accustomed to thinking of as sight.

I think it's this "distinct seeing" that I'm categorizing as subtle - not really subtle.

Thank you for this. Good stuff.

[Delma]

Very good.

It's interesting to note how absolutely impossible it is to shut off seeing. So then, does the body see? Does the view belong to it?

And then let's look again at what that means for the body. Is it owned?

Delma

[Dimitri]

Let's see. The body itself doesn't appear to be owned and so how could something that is itself ownerless, own anything else?

The sense organs are attached to the body so the seeing is being done by the body but the "view" of that seeing, that's the lens of piece of paper from earlier. It just is. The lens doesn't own light.

View occurs to me in this moment, simply as the medium (as in art medium) that sense "results" pass through or land on/in.

It's all just view... everything. There seems to be some both/and thing happening here that language just can't explain. The body exists. Eyes are attached to the body. Seeing happens with the eyes... AND seeing is perceived, considered, realized, thought about, felt about, logged into memory. All of these after AND events are something else, are beyond the eyes.

The body seems like a kind of computer peripheral, like a scanner. Data is "captured" but then what?

None of it is owned, not the body, not the eyeball, not sight, not light, not view. This ownership thing it make believe, an idea. Hell, the body doesn't even seem rented. It's just here, contributing data to view.

This wanting seems to be what creates the idea of ownership... and somehow it's the propellant that moves everything along.

[Delma]

Is there a separate self? Tell me what your experience of self is now.

[Dimitri]

Not a new question for us Delma but feeling pretty stumped. Maybe it's confusion, or disbelief, maybe just shock... and an ant's breath of relief.

Self is an idea, a collection of thoughts and memories within view, not anything real.

That's all I've got. Feeling pretty dissociated, as if I'm literally in shock. Weird.

[Delma]

I'm going to pose the 5 closing questions now, but please don't consider this closed. It'll be an assessment and then we can continue if you'd like.

But first.... take a look around. Is anything different? I imagine things are pretty much carrying on as they have, and that's because there has never been a separate self at all... just a sense of one. That sense is ok and fine to be there. It's just a paradigm.

So, to the questions.... please answer in your own words and add any insights and perceptions no matter how offbeat, unusual, or crazy they sound. Write as much as you can on each. Some of these are points we may not yet have covered together, and yet you may still have a sense of how to respond using any new insights. What I would love to read is how this appears to 'you' now.

I'll be back and we can tackle any sticky points.

Questions:

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, intention, free will, choice and control. What makes things happen? How does it work? What are you responsible for? Give examples from experience.




6) Anything to add?


Thank you! Excellent work through this entire process!

Delma

[Dimitri]

Thank you Delma. I will get working on these. It may take me a few days.

[Delma]

All good. I look forward to reading your responses and feel they will be worth the wait. We'll be able to see where we've landed.

:)

[Dimitri]

1. No, there is no separate “self,” “me,” or “I...” anywhere. There never has been. This notion of “I” was simply adopted as an assumption at some early age. It seems like the most unconscious, subtle, and profoundly impactful assumption ever… ever.

It’s as if to be able to use language, we need a label - we need something to call ourselves and to call each other. It seems that somehow this labeling solidifies as an identity, a notion that identity is an actual thing, that all of this viewing, these memories, ideas, and feelings actually constitute something other than a collection of ideas. This occurs to me as a very unfortunate fallout of language and our own intelligence. What I don't get is how or why it seems so difficult to see through this false idea. In some way I totally get it and yet I can’t quite seem to see it as clearly as I would like.

2. The illusion of self is the very strongly held belief – no, it’s a down right definitive assertion - that self exists as an independent and separate thing… and it just doesn’t. There’s nothing there. There’s a body. There’s a brain. There just is no “me” or “I,” not as actual entities at least. “Me” and “I” are just ideas, unlike all other ideas. Ideas happen but their content isn’t real and so as the content of this idea, “me” and “I” aren’t real either.

This idea of self seems so strongly held that I can’t imagine there is anything more at the core of it all. We hold onto it so tightly that it’s as if our lives depend upon it and yet it’s clear that life does not depend on this at all. Crickets and dogs and pigs and plants and all of it goes on living fine and dandy without this idea running. It’s so strange that we seem to need it so much.

It seems that this all starts when we are children when someone calls us by a name. Then we call ourselves by this same name... and off it goes like some ridiculous grand chain reaction, for the rest of our lives. Our self-reflective capacity seems to make all this possible. Dogs don't seem to have this issue. They don’t seem to wonder about where their lives are going or how things have been – they just live, grow old, and then die.

3. Honestly, I get it, I totally get it, but I really still can't seem to feel it… that or I can only barely feel it, like an ant’s breath of knowing. Nothing feels particularly different in any way. I feel marginally less triggered or attached to things, slightly less offended or upset by things. And yet even though I know that there is no "I" to take it all personally, this seems to happen.

4. I don't think I'm completely over the edge. Barely anything seems to have changed. Is this it? Maybe I am over and I just can’t tell, or maybe I’m partially over and pieces are not yet on board yet. I don’t know. I feel like giving up. I feel more committed than ever. I feel confused and lost. I wonder if waking up is even a real possibility.

5. Decision, intention, free will, choice, and control all seem to simply be ideas as well. They all rely on a self but there is none. I will call these things “direction.” Direction happens... and when there is a belief in "self" then direction seems to come from self. But direction just happens. Direction is life flowing… even without self, which doesn’t exist.

There is direction (life flowing) and there is view (awareness of direction). That literally seems to be all there is – no seer doing the viewing, no director doing the directing. Free will is an illusion.

I don't know what makes these things happen - they just do, through this body or through some other body. Oddly there is nobody to be responsible, except that responsibility and "responsible" (according to some) action also happens. People are held responsible by others but this just seems to be some kind of drama, the play of life, doing its thing. None of it seems good or bad. It all just is. So curious.

I apologize for taking so long with this Delma and I feel as if I probably haven’t written enough. I sure have been thinking about this a lot but feel I need to become more disciplined about writing regularly. Have been trying to do all of this on my phone, which is silly and not super conducive to me getting a lot of words out. I need to get my computer situation sorted out so that I can write more.

I’m taking January, February, and maybe March off and traveling to South East Asia. I need to get away from the 9-5 universe. There is so much more I want to put my attention on, namely getting this done.

Please be straight with me. Tell me I’ve not worked hard enough. Tell me I’m not there. Tell me whatever you believe is true. Thank you.

[Delma]

Terrific responses for typing on a phone. Wow. Thank you for taking the time.

Here's where it appears that 'you' are. That there isn't a self is clearly seen, however, there's this lingering idea that there's someone who is seeing this, and someone to get there (wherever there is). So, what's expected is that there will be a shift for a you.

But there can't be. Look at these questions:

What came to the forum?
What is doing the inquiry?
What discovered everything posted in the answer above?

Don't just look for the lack of a you, look for the entity which did all of those things.

And then, if the self hasn't ever been there, what in the world would be different? This isn't a realization that comes to a you, this is a recognition that life has always operated this way. It's a shift, but is it earth shattering? Maybe. Maybe not. It's different depending upon the circumstances.

If a you has never been there, then what's been happening?

Delma

[Delma]

This is almost done. There's just one more step back, one more thread to unwind.

Look at this sentence:

I Am.

What's wrong with that sentence? Point to the "I" separate from the "Am". And then you'll see how rooted this thing really is. Step back and analyze just that sentence. Is there an "I" that is looking for the "I"?

[Dimitri]

Whoa! This is so obvious and I totally missed it. I will look at this short sentence. All there as been in this search and inquiry has been view and direction. Apparently direction simply headed this way and view saw and that's it. What a crazy game of hide and seek!

Let me look at the sentence and get back to you. Thank you Delma. I'm feeling super grateful for you at this moment.

[Dimitri]

"I am." Well, there simply is no "I." What's left is "am." Am is to be, to exist. "I" don't exist but existing is. Am or existence happens... but there is no "I" necessary for 'amming' to happen. The trees exist but there is no "I." The same goes for dogs and pigs and whatever. Am just is. Am is happening. Am is real. Am is true. And so I'd simply rephrase it as "Am is."

What's happening is happening. What's viewing is viewing. Direction is direction-ing. What's real is true. View and Vector is all that is. (I'm rebranding "Direction" as "Vector" for some fortunate alliteration.) Maybe that will be the title of my book. ; )

[Delma]

Nice.

Is this a shift?

In the absence of an I, but the presence of "Am", does the "Am" belong to anything?

[Dimitri]

A shift? I don't know Delma. As you say, why would anything seem any different? Nothing changes. Everything is exactly as it's always been, just not owned or managed, right or wrong, important or insignificant, blah or blah.

Am just is. Am doesn't belong to anything. It's all just view and vector, that which is happening and a perception of it. There is no perceiver, no doer, no manager, no owner. It all happens very nicely on it's own, without any of that stuff.