Alex

[vinceschubert]

being not precise at times comes from not being a native English speaker.Ha, nobody is precise when it comes to discussing this stuff. The english language itself isn't precise enough.
It might be more problematic to keep in mind that it is only an avatar and not the self.It is fine for it to be automatic and beneath awareness for interactions where that works. It is when a negative emotion arises (and positive emotions where they reveal identification with a Self) that Recognition needs to kick in and a laugh or chuckle does its' bit in brain re-wiring. This is why it is important to do this every time story appears until this is established as habit.
Constantly experiencing THIS with awareness...Hmm, this may be an expectation that you have ?
No, a bit like stopping thought, it isn't going to happen. The organism with the label Alex, is, after all, human. No super human attributes are going to emerge.
Once again, this can/will kick in when needed. ...and once again, when negative emotions appear is the trigger.
Example; yesterday i responded to your post (on my iPad, as my laptop power supply has died) and when i hit submit, i got an error message, and what i had spent an hour on, disappeared. (for the second time in two days). This is IT ! states quite clearly that what happened is done. Finished. ..and any negative emotion is not only wasted, but is unnecessary suffering. In this instance there was no apparent anger or frustration. Just "make sure you put it in clipboard before submitting in future."
Can this be experienced in another way than just through thought?Perhaps being pedantic again, Yes. The experiencing happens before thought. The experiencing of the thought component only happen, either with the need to communicate the experience (past tense) or with the minds obsessive need to analyse or label/categorise it. The latter will diminish with the laughing exercise. As it is SEEn to be happening.
By now i expect that you are bursting into laughter a hundred times a day ?..

love

vince

[Alexw]

Yes, I have to remember the laughing exercise - just don't want to look like a lunatic walking around giggling all the time ;-) I guess you are right, sometimes I am expecting too much - its a progress and it will take some time to sink in and become a new way of life. So where do we go from here? Will the experience of one-ness grow over time? What practice would you recommend to solidify that?
Also, I want to let you know how grateful I am that you took the time to help me see life in a different light and to help me experience some great things! Thank you!

[vinceschubert]

remember the laughing exercise - just don't want to look like a lunatic walking around giggling all the time Go back and re-read the bit about laughing. Particularly the bit that says "That laugh can be anything from an inward chuckle to a full bellied guffaw. Whatever it is, the important thing is that you feel your stomach contract" Even just an inward smile and a fake stomach contraction will do it. Just smiling with your eyes will change the way you feel. Try it now. Smile just with your eyes. and observe sensations.
...and remember, we are celebrating the Recognising of the arising of story, of a thought stream that is being believed and will evoke emotion.

gotta run.

love vince

[Alexw]

Ok, got it. Smiling now!
Just a few more questions:
So where do we go from here? Will the experience of one-ness grow over time?
What practice would you recommend to solidify that?

[vinceschubert]

What practice would you recommend to solidify that?Appreciate that THIS IS IT!.

love

vince (grin)

[Alexw]

OK, will do :-)
Thanks again.
Alex

[vinceschubert]

OK, will do
Oh. really ?
How will you do this ?

Can it be anything other than having the intention to remember to consider that there is only NOW ? That anything that mind can focus on has already finished ? (..or is a fantasy about the future ?)

Is Alex doing something, possible ? ..or is its' Reality purely conceptual ?
Outside of current experiencing (before thought arises), what is Real ?

love vince

[Alexw]

This made me laugh!
Yes, I wrote the "will do" out of a habit... could have also written "cheers"... anyway, did not plan to DO anything, just a saying that hit, or better missed, the point...

I am getting better at "catching the I" when it starts playing up - funny thing: the fictional I catching itself..? I guess you can really only have something catching itself if its not real :-) having the internal laugh, and letting it go as just a story. "My" awareness of the now, the experiencing of the current moment is slowly getting stronger - which again reduces the need to "catch the I" - as there is no I in the NOW - it lives in the past and in the future.
By the way: Language is a funny thing, so "I" focussed... without this constant focus on the "I" when writing, talking and thinking, realisation would be a lot more straightforward...

Is Alex doing something, possible ? ..or is its' Reality purely conceptual ?
Outside of current experiencing (before thought arises), what is Real ?

Who is really doing anything? There is only experiencing. Is there a difference of the experience of Alex and the experience of the star in the sky? If so, then only in the amount of data that is generated by the experience and being processed by the brain (and later on put into concepts - thus we have a bigger concept of the I than of the star - so we identify ourselves with the I, not the star) - otherwise there is only experience. So it is even wrong to talk of an I that has an experience - there is only experiencing... in the now... nothing else. This is it.

[Alexw]

...also a few things suddenly make a lot more sense... cryptical Zen sayings like "the void that contains all things" are understood! Experiencing has no substance - it is a void, nothingness - but it still contains everything, you, me, the universe...
strange that the fictional I seems to feel happy about these experiences even they basically support the dismantling of the illusion of the I... maybe there is an underlying, built in drive to experience truth..?

[Alexw]

Had a few days to think about things and just re-read the above. Just a few comments as I see things from a different angle by now:
"I am getting better at "catching the I" when it starts playing up - funny thing: the fictional I catching itself..?"
I feel that this is closer to the truth: "The one that is watching/observing is getting better at "catching the I" when it starts playing up". I also can't find a "fictional I that is catching itself" - as this would be a thought catching a thought. It feels like there is an observer that is watching the scene - he is "catching the I thought". Thus the observer is not a thought - it has to be beyond it. Awareness?

The statement "there is no I in the NOW - it lives in the past and in the future" does not feel right either. I believe that memory of past I-thoughts are accessed to construct the new I-thought, the I thought itself seems to be in the now and is also caught by the watcher and classified as a story in the now.

"Who is really doing anything? There is only experiencing"
I guess it depends on how you look at it if this is correct or not... when looking at it from our "normal point of view" then there seems to be a doer, something that is done and something that is mysteriously observing it. Beyond the mind the only one that is left should be the observer = awareness. The doer and the thing done are just concepts/stories of the mind... but now the mind is theorising...

[vinceschubert]

Thus the observer is not a thought - it has to be beyond it. Awareness?

This is obviously a logical deduction. It is also based on a presumption, an idea that there has to be an observer.
You previously have said; "Who is really doing anything? There is only experiencing."
Is this still the case ?
i suspect that you have just had a relapse into believing that thought has inherent validity ? ..or maybe there is some satisfaction in following thought to a point of resolution ?

the I thought itself seems to be in the now and is also caught by the watcher and classified as a story in the now.

Isn't it already in the past when it is "caught by the watcher" ?

if this is correct or not..

Is there any such thing as "correct" in Reality (current experiencing) ? ..or is this purely conceptual ?

but now the mind is theorising...

Yes, that's what mind does. It's good that you can SEE it happening.

love

vince

[Alexw]

Yes, you are right... thinking there is an observer is again only a thought, a concept... as soon as something that is experienced is passed on from pure experiencing to becoming a thought it is already put into a concept/story. everything after experiencing/awareness is not real/pure anymore, but polluted by memory and concepts.

Yes, the "I thought" would have to be in the past as only experiencing is in the now. The I thought is a follow up from experience that has been put into context and the I has been added so it is more juicy

Again, I see your point. Correct in not correct does not exist in experiencing - no duality is possible in pure experiencing as there is only experiencing and no putting into context.

I see now that everything, as soon as the mind as picked it up and played around with it, is not "real" anymore... it seems I am back at "only experiencing is real - everything that follows is a fake"... maybe that is where my watcher came from... a bit like somebody sitting in the cinema and watching a movie - just silently watching but not getting involved... the movie character gets involved and most of the time we think we are the movie character - only when we really look at things closely we realise that we are only watching (experiencing)...

[Alexw]

...actually it really feels more like the watcher IS the experience - have been meditating and concentrating on only listening - at times it really felt like I am the sound...

[Alexw]

..and..to describe the feeling of being the sound a bit closer:
it feels like there is a basic awareness, which feels a bit like a "self" (not a self with concepts attached - just a sense of self, which feels like it should still be there also if there is absolutely no sensory input or even after loosing all memory) which then "extends" to become the sound... hard to describe...

[vinceschubert]

everything after experiencing/awareness is not real/pure anymore, but polluted by memory and concepts.

Using the words "pure" and "polluted" introduce judgements. Did you see this when you wrote it ? We have already agreed that there is no good or bad in the Real.
Having said that, i know what you mean, and you're right. But look deeper, does this then become part of the Real ?
When you SEE that happen, enough to dissolve it ?

and the I has been added so it is more juicy

Well, maybe.
By "I", do you mean the identifying with the concept ? The story of Alex ?
Are you SEEing thoughts doing what thoughts do ? Adding (possible) meaning to everything ?

everything that follows is a fake"...

No it's not. It overlays experiencing, but becomes experiencing. It's just unnecessary and a waste of energy and a garden path for experiencing. (my story)

it really felt like I am the sound...

Ha, Yes ! But language again... Saying "The sound", objectifies it. Would it be more accurate to say there is just sounding ?

..and..to describe the feeling of being the sound a bit closer:

It doesn't take much to get to where it can't be communicated.

Alex, have another go at these questions;
1) Is there a separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form? Was there ever?

2) "Describe your experience of the illusion of separate self, how it arises/disappears. Is that process always the same, or does it vary, and if so, how?"

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) Do you decide, intend, choose, control events in Life? Do you make anything happen? Give examples from your experience.

6) Anything to add?

love

vince