Let's gooooo

[graceabounds]

Well, location feels like a concept in the mind, I can kinda ignore it and see only the images and sensations

Very good, let’s circle back to the clock then and try to find a sound...if sound is actually heard.

Again google for one if you don’t have a ticking one handy. Once again focus on the experience of the tick tock sound. Set aside all thought, images, ideas or theories about what must be going on. Attune to the sounds themselves.

Going by hearing alone, do you directly experience a sound apart from your sense of hearing?
Do you experience a sound getting closer to your range of hearing before you actually hear it?
Do you experience a sound after you hear it?
Do you experience an unheard sound of any kind?

Allow your eyes to open.
Were you able to establish, in your direct experience of hearing, that sounds enter your sense of hearing. In other words, in direct/actual experience is there a hearer AND sound?

[megacoolname]

Going by hearing alone, do you directly experience a sound apart from your sense of hearing?

No, if I ignore thoughts, science, and analysis from my mind, there is the sound directly.
But I've a curious mind who always wants to check if the science-theories are correct or invalidated. I've a hard time completely ignoring that

Do you experience a sound getting closer to your range of hearing before you actually hear it?

No, it's instant

Do you experience a sound after you hear it?

No

Do you experience an unheard sound of any kind?

No

Were you able to establish, in your direct experience of hearing, that sounds enter your sense of hearing. In other words, in direct/actual experience is there a hearer AND sound?

From direct experience free of thoughts and concepts, I can't establish that the sound is entering my sense of hearing.

[megacoolname]

Were you able to establish, in your direct experience of hearing, that sounds enter your sense of hearing. In other words, in direct/actual experience is there a hearer AND sound?

I want to precise that although I can't establish that the sounds enter my sense of hearing, and thus that therefore it would seems illogical that there would be an actual "hearer", there is almost always a sensation that there is an hearer, but just sometimes it seems to vanish almost entirely or partially

[graceabounds]

But I've a curious mind who always wants to check if the science-theories are correct or invalidated. I've a hard time completely ignoring that

Yep.
What is the belief underneath that wanting to know?
In the body is there some sensation associated with the prospect of not knowing or not being correct?

I want to precise that although I can't establish that the sounds enter my sense of hearing, and thus that therefore it would seems illogical that there would be an actual "hearer", there is almost always a sensation that there is an hearer, but just sometimes it seems to vanish almost entirely or partially

Exactly.
So what function was the hearer actually performing?
When it goes does anything change?

[megacoolname]

What is the belief underneath that wanting to know?

Sorry I don't understand the question xD

In the body is there some sensation associated with the prospect of not knowing or not being correct?

No, it's more mental, like a small irritation, or an unsatisfied curiosity, a need to check and challenge

So what function was the hearer actually performing?

it performs no action. it does nothing else than being felt as being the hearer

When it goes does anything change?

there is the feeling of "me" on the sounds: no separation between me and the sound. It is the only thing that changes.

[graceabounds]

there is the feeling of "me" on the sounds: no separation between me and the sound

But if there’s no separation, is there still a me?

Find that sensation of “being the hearer” (if it isn’t vanishing)
Watch it arise. Let it be exactly as it is.
And now ask:
What makes this “hearer” feel like me?
What exactly links this neutral sensation to identity?

[megacoolname]

But if there’s no separation, is there still a me?

there is the feeling of "me", but not only on the body.
also when there isn't a separation with sounds, I still feel separated in term of vision

Watch it arise. Let it be exactly as it is.
And now ask:
What makes this “hearer” feel like me?
What exactly links this neutral sensation to identity?

It think it's the initial movement of attention.
I feel like I am the one deciding where to move the attention to, to move it toward a sound.

Or maybe it's the sensation of beingness, and the belief that I exist. If there's something, there is "being", and thus, a "me" existing? I'm not totally sure.

[graceabounds]

Going to give you more than usual to play with. Feel free to break up the responses if needed.

FIRST: separation in vision

Close your eyes. With eyes closed, you will now experience 'blackness'. There may be other things you can find going on, sure. If you are looking at a bright light, there may be a red glow. There may be sparkly bits or cloudy flecks appearing and disappearing - It really doesn't matter about the specifics. Just to make things simple, whatever you can see with eyes closed, I'm going to refer to it as 'black' or 'blackness' just for simplicity.

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/thought?


SECOND: ‘I’ move attention

1. Sit still.
2. Let sounds happen.
3. Let vision stay open.
4. Don’t “try” to focus on anything.
5. Watch where attention moves.

When attention shifts from sound, to sight, to thought, to itch:
Who moved it?

Did you decide to move attention to that sound?
Did you plan to notice your left hand?
Did you choose the exact moment that the next thought popped up?
Or did attention just… move?

6. Try to decide where to place your attention.

Make it go to the sound of the fridge.
Now to your feet.
Now to the space between sounds.

Where did the intention come from?
Can you find a place where “you” generated the command?


THIRD: “ maybe it's the sensation of beingness, and the belief that I exist”

A belief is a thought. The leap from being to “me” is just a concept.

There’s being.
But is it someone’s being?


-Becca

[megacoolname]

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

yep

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

through the eyes no. sometimes there is a bit of mental images.

3) Can what is witnessing the blackness be found?

no, only a sensation of "me" in my chest, with nothing behind

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?

There is only blackness and a sensation of me x)

Can an INHERENT SEE-ER be found? Would anything that is suggested as the see-er, be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

there is no inherent see-er, only a feeling/concept of it

When attention shifts from sound, to sight, to thought, to itch:
Who moved it?

Did you decide to move attention to that sound?
Did you plan to notice your left hand?
Did you choose the exact moment that the next thought popped up?
Or did attention just… move?

it just moves

6. Try to decide where to place your attention.

Make it go to the sound of the fridge.
Now to your feet.
Now to the space between sounds.

Where did the intention come from?
Can you find a place where “you” generated the command?

Well, I've no clue where the decision to move my attention from x to y comes from, I can't find where it comes from, it just pops into reality

[graceabounds]

Very good.
And this?

THIRD: “ maybe it's the sensation of beingness, and the belief that I exist”

A belief is a thought. The leap from being to “me” is just a concept.

There’s being.
But is it someone’s being?

[megacoolname]

THIRD: “ maybe it's the sensation of beingness, and the belief that I exist”

A belief is a thought. The leap from being to “me” is just a concept.

There’s being.
But is it someone’s being?

It's more like, someone being into being

[graceabounds]

It's more like, someone being into being

Haha, there is being certainly. Unquestioned. But where is the someone? -->

OK Let's move on to opening the eyes now.

Again, address this very simply - The 'seeing' sense only for the moment. With eyes open, a world of objects appears . . . a room . . . a computer screen etc What you can specifically see isn't of interest here, and whatever it is, I am simply going to
refer to it as 'what can be seen'.

This might be a little more tricky, but give it some consideration.
1) With eyes open, can you confirm that what is experienced is 'what can be seen' as I mentioned?
2) Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than 'what can be seen'?
3) Can what is witnessing 'what can be seen' be found?
4) Can a pair of eyes, an 'I' / 'me', a Justin be found that is witnessing 'what can be seen'? Or is there just simply 'what can be seen' 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/thought?

no, only a sensation of "me" in my chest, with nothing behind

What makes this sensation 'me'?
If the sensation fades, is anything (or anyone) lost?

...Could it just be... a sensation?

Well, I've no clue where the decision to move my attention from x to y comes from, I can't find where it comes from, it just pops into reality

Exactly. Where is the you in this? The do-er? or any center?

[megacoolname]

hi becca,

1) With eyes open, can you confirm that what is experienced is 'what can be seen' as I mentioned?

Yes i confirm x)

2) Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than 'what can be seen'?

No, I don't know how there could be

3) Can what is witnessing 'what can be seen' be found?

Only as a concept/feeling, but I doubt that a feeling itself can see? So, no

4) Can a pair of eyes, an 'I' / 'me', a Justin be found that is witnessing 'what can be seen'? Or is there just simply 'what can be seen' to be found?

I can't see my eyes, but I'm pretty sure that it's them doing the seeing.
In "what can be seen", there is no "I", as "I" is just a feeling and not a visual thing, so there can only be "what can be seen"

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/thought?

I find no entity that actively decides to see, the seeing is automatic, from the eyes of the body. But since it's just from one body, it cuts/individualize the seeing from the rest of the world. The eyes are the center of what is seen. Although it is true that I can't see my eyes, I'm sure that there won't be seeing anymore if I remove them :/

What makes this sensation 'me'?
If the sensation fades, is anything (or anyone) lost?


...Could it just be... a sensation?

I think what makes this sensation of me may be that the body is the center of the senses.
If the sensation fades, nothing is lost/lessened except the feeling of "me" itself

And yes it could very well just be a sensation, actually I'm pretty sure it is only a sensation, but it is a persistent one!

Exactly. Where is the you in this? The do-er? or any center?

I'm nowhere in this apparently! But still I feel like I am there, I just can't justify it intellectually or find myself as something more than a feeling in direct experience.
I don't know what could be the center of attention, but the center of senses would be the body and its sense organs

[graceabounds]

I can't see my eyes, but I'm pretty sure that it's them doing the seeing.

Haha yes, and on a conventional level of course this is known. But how is this known? Staying right in direct experience…

Look at whatever is in front of you. It is seen from the perspective of two windows (eyes) or is it like a windscreen view? Now zoom back in and try to find the thing that’s seeing. Is there seeing separate from what’s seen, or is there just what’s seen?
And ultimately…
Is there any awareness separate from experience or is there just experience?

it cuts/individualize the seeing from the rest of the world

Again can this be known without a thought of a different experience?

And yes it could very well just be a sensation, actually I'm pretty sure it is only a sensation, but it is a persistent one

Great, where is this sensation of me? Pin it down precisely.

But still I feel like I am there, I just can't justify it intellectually or find myself as something more than a feeling in direct experience.

Great, stay in the body. Don’t justify it intellectually!

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.

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?

[megacoolname]

I'll answer you tomorrow, I'm super tired because of overworking xD. Thank you for your guiding I think it is super useful