I am legion!

[Ann O'Nymous]

Something is stopping me from seeing! I think it might be, as you suggested, the perception that I am busy trying to align my thoughts rather than just relaxing and opening my eyes.

This sort of seeing is not the sort of seeing that I am used to. My eyes seem to be open, but I am no longer sure that I am seeing what is there. It's like those Magic Eye pictures. I could never see them either...and used to wonder if it was all a fraud. I needed people to tell me, "Look - it's an elephant" so that I could try to see the elephant. I could never see the elephant. I needed people to say, "Look...there's it's trunk!" But I could never see even the trunk.

You seem to be saying to me, "Look! There's everything!" and, damn it, I can't see what you are pointing out. I can look around my office now. I see a computer, walls, a lunchbox, an iPad, a calendar, a window. Would you see the same?

[neeeel]

You seem to be saying to me, "Look! There's everything!" and, damn it, I can't see what you are pointing out.

What I am trying to point to , is where you can look and see that your belief in a separate self is false. So, for example you believe that you are the thinker of thoughts, the decision maker, the chooser, and I point to what to look at ( thoughts, how they happen, how much control you have over them, and so on) in order to show you that your belief is false.

Its possible that I am not being clear enough, if so , please let me know

I can look around my office now. I see a computer, walls, a lunchbox, an iPad, a calendar, a window. Would you see the same?

Yes, of course I would. I havent switched off my labelling system.

but what I do see, when I look, is that the labelling is happening all on its own. I am not doing it, I am not controlling it, I am not making it happen. "I" am not making anything happen. I see how my theres the objects and people, and then theres the thoughts about the objects and people, and my thoughts are pretty much illusionary and false. And, I am not making my thoughts happen either.

This is all we are looking at. we are not looking to change anything, or turn anything off, or delete anything, or remove anything. All we are doing is NOTICING what is really happening.

[Ann O'Nymous]

I am sure that it is my obtuseness which is at issue here, Neil! I don't think that I am the thinker of thoughts any more. My limited stint meditating has shown me that this is most definitely not the case. But I think that I still regard myself as the perceiver of thoughts.

I imagine your answer would be, "Well, what is it that is perceiving the thoughts? Can you point to it? Touch it? Find it? See it?" And my answer would be no.

So you might say, "Well, what is the self that is perceiving the thoughts?" and I would agree with you that there is no self. But I don't really know what that means.

Is the question here whether perceptions need to have perceivers? Do thoughts need thinkers? Maybe not to create them but to experience them?

What are the consequences of recognising that all thoughts are illusionary? How do they manifest themselves in living? This is what I am not seeing. Because I can look at my lunchbox and think, "Well, I didn't decide that this was a lunchbox. It might just as easily be a coin box or a screw box." But this seems to be far removed in its mundaneness from what you are pointing me towards. I can look at it and see a regularly shaped transparent shape made of plastic with a tight fitting lid, but this seems to be a case of not seeing the forest for the trees.

At work, if an irate employee comes into my office and starts shouting at me and crying, what is to be gained from me seeing a person and hearing loud noises? Isn't it more useful to see someone who seems to be upset about something and trying to help them by listening and showing empathy? Doesn't my empathy require me to understand what she is experiencing? Can I do this if all I do is notice what is happening?

[neeeel]

So you might say, "Well, what is the self that is perceiving the thoughts?" and I would agree with you that there is no self. But I don't really know what that means.

do you need to know what it means? "what it means" is in the realm of thought.
Are you looking for consequences of not having that belief any more , as in "what would it mean if I didnt believe in a self?"

Is the question here whether perceptions need to have perceivers? Do thoughts need thinkers? Maybe not to create them but to experience them?

If you are just the experiencer, and not the doer, then in what way does this "self" have any effect on anything? How does this self DO anything?

When you do the exercise with listening to sounds that I suggested a few posts back, do you find 3 things, the sound, the experience of the sound, and the experiencer of the sound?

Can the sound be separated from the awareness of the sound?

What are the consequences of recognising that all thoughts are illusionary? How do they manifest themselves in living? This is what I am not seeing. Because I can look at my lunchbox and think, "Well, I didn't decide that this was a lunchbox. It might just as easily be a coin box or a screw box." But this seems to be far removed in its mundaneness from what you are pointing me towards. I can look at it and see a regularly shaped transparent shape made of plastic with a tight fitting lid

This is it exactly. The (close to) direct experience of the box is "a regularly shaped transparent shape made of plastic with a tight fitting lid", then there are all the thoughts and concepts about it. Thats my lunch box, I bought it from ASDA, I put that sticker on it, I can still smell the orange from yesterdays lunch.

Look, thoughts are useful. If I want to go buy food, I can think of my nearest supermarket, and the way to get there. BUT, those thoughts are not the supermarket, and are not the journey I actually would take, with all the sense perceptions that would go along with that journey.

At work, if an irate employee comes into my office and starts shouting at me and crying, what is to be gained from me seeing a person and hearing loud noises?

Because that is the base truth of the situation. That is what is actually happening( although even that involves, concepts,stories). Then, on top of that comes the "oh no, theyve gone crazy again, what did I do", "He is really starting to annoy me now", "I wish he would shut up and go away", when all that is really happening is some loud noises, and some thoughts about the loud noises. Its not about whats to be gained, or what is useful. Its about noticing what is real.

Isn't it more useful to see someone who seems to be upset about something and trying to help them by listening and showing empathy? Doesn't my empathy require me to understand what she is experiencing? Can I do this if all I do is notice what is happening?

Imagine if all you saw was a person making loud noises. You had no vested interest in making them shut up, you didnt feel angry, because you didnt believe they were annoying you. You didnt recoil from them, or reject them. You simply saw what was there, a person making loud noises. Would you be better equipped to deal with that situation, right in that moment? without all your concepts and beliefs? Yes, your reaction might be empathy, and kindness. Or it might not.

But we are getting distracted here. This is all just mind chatter, confusion.

Its like you have had a first glimpse of how empty and deconstructed things are , as in your post from yesterday, and your mind is jumping in going "but but but" and trying to make sense of it all, of how it fits into your current knowledge and world view.

The mind does what it does. But you say you have seen that you are not doing your thoughts. So, if the thoughts arent yours, why are they any more important than, say, the buzzing of the refrigerator?

We really need to focus a bit , I dont think its useful for me to try and answer your questions. Take a day, or two, keep looking, keep noticing, and report back tomorrow

[Ann O'Nymous]

Hi

Are you looking for consequences of not having that belief any more , as in "what would it mean if I didnt believe in a self?"

Yes - I think this is what I am looking for. But I think I also know the answer!

If you are just the experiencer, and not the doer, then in what way does this "self" have any effect on anything? How does this self DO anything?

Hm. The experience must give rise to something - thoughts, emotions, feelings. But these, as I know, are not real. The self -for want of a better word- just experiences these experiences. I suspect that the experience and the experience of the experience are one and the same thing. Which suggests to me that the experiencer of the experience of the experience might also belong within the package. In brief, there is only the experience.

When you do the exercise with listening to sounds that I suggested a few posts back, do you find 3 things, the sound, the experience of the sound, and the experiencer of the sound?

Can the sound be separated from the awareness of the sound?

No. There is the sound and the experience of the sound and the awareness of the sound. I think I was adding the thoughts and ideas that the sound can give rise to into the mix. But I realise that these are not part of the experience and are not real.

I

ts like you have had a first glimpse of how empty and deconstructed things are , as in your post from yesterday, and your mind is jumping in going "but but but" and trying to make sense of it all, of how it fits into your current knowledge and world view.

That's exactly what it's like! I can't stop trying to make sense of it all and fit it into my "experience" of the world.

I started to think that I may find refuge in the metaphor of the cinema. When I go to the cinema, I know that what I am seeing is not real, but I am prepared to believe it is. To the point where my body undergoes physiological changes as a result of what I am seeing. But I cannot smell what the actors smell; I cannot see what the actors see; I cannot touch what the actors touch. I wondered if what I need to be able to do is, as O2 say, Be More Dog. A dog in the cinema would be so deprived of the data streams necessary to see the world that they would not be fooled for a moment!

[neeeel]

Are you looking for consequences of not having that belief any more , as in "what would it mean if I didnt believe in a self?"

Yes - I think this is what I am looking for. But I think I also know the answer!

I think its a fair question/concern, but as mentioned in my last post, I dont think its useful for me to be answering your questions right now.

Hm. The experience must give rise to something - thoughts, emotions, feelings. But these, as I know, are not real. The self -for want of a better word- just experiences these experiences. I suspect that the experience and the experience of the experience are one and the same thing. Which suggests to me that the experiencer of the experience of the experience might also belong within the package. In brief, there is only the experience.

Im a bit worried now though. You seem to have the wrong end of the stick,like totally the opposite of what I have been pointing at ( which is my fault, if anyones )

You say you know that thoughts, emotions, feelings are not real. But these are the things that ARE real, in that thoughts are perceived, emotions and feelings( through sensations and feelings in the body) are perceived. Whereas you say " the self just experiences those experiences" but the self is NOT real. If the self doesnt exist, then how can it experience anything?

Your whole paragraph above, is just conjecture, logical deduction etc. "I suspect" "it suggests to me", and so on. This is of no use in finding out whether the self exists. We need LOOKING, not logic.

No. There is the sound and the experience of the sound and the awareness of the sound. I think I was adding the thoughts and ideas that the sound can give rise to into the mix. But I realise that these are not part of the experience and are not real.

So you are saying that you can find, in direct experience, a sound, an experience of the sound, and the awareness of the sound? In direct experience ( which is outside of the content of thought) you can find these three things? Can you describe to me how you found them? Where are the boundaries between , for example, the sound, and the awareness of the sound?

Its like you have had a first glimpse of how empty and deconstructed things are , as in your post from yesterday, and your mind is jumping in going "but but but" and trying to make sense of it all, of how it fits into your current knowledge and world view.

That's exactly what it's like! I can't stop trying to make sense of it all and fit it into my "experience" of the world.

Thats just it, you most likely cant make sense of it with a mind that operates in the areas of concepts, beliefs and ideas. If you see that, as we discussed, compassion is just a label, then the mind will find it very hard to grasp that.

I started to think that I may find refuge in the metaphor of the cinema. When I go to the cinema, I know that what I am seeing is not real, but I am prepared to believe it is. To the point where my body undergoes physiological changes as a result of what I am seeing. But I cannot smell what the actors smell; I cannot see what the actors see; I cannot touch what the actors touch. I wondered if what I need to be able to do is, as O2 say, Be More Dog. A dog in the cinema would be so deprived of the data streams necessary to see the world that they would not be fooled for a moment!

Its actually an interesting metaphor, and one that gets used often in LU, although not quite in the way you use it.
So when you go to the cinema, your body undergoes physiological changes( feelings, emotions, sensations, etc) as a result of what you see on the screen. but note, that everything you see on the screen is completely unreal. None of the actions actually happen, and certainly none of them happen to you. None of the characters are real, they dont exist. Does this sound familiar?

With regard to the dog, there is a vital thing you are missing. The dog has access to exactly the same data streams as you. In every regard, except one. Sound, sight, touch, smell, taste. And yet, they are not fooled. Why are they not fooled? what is the one thing that humans have access to, that dogs dont? Why is it that this one thing allows the creation of a whole story, and a whole set of feelings, around what the dog sees as just light and sound?

[Ann O'Nymous]

Hi

Im a bit worried now though. You seem to have the wrong end of the stick,like totally the opposite of what I have been pointing at ( which is my fault, if anyones )

Don't worry! I'm just being imprecise. Yes - I know that thoughts are real...I meant that the contents of the thoughts are not!

Actually, I am beginning to see things now. Where I have been going wrong is in trying to find the self in order to say to it that it is not real. Now I see.

There is no self. There is no anything. There is experience. No more.

The key to me has been to abandon the hunt for no-self; instead, to see that instead of looking for things that don't exist (!), I should be looking at everything that does. You are probably hitting your head and screaming, "THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN TELLING YOU!!!"

What does exist? Everything.Kind of. Because it doesn't really exist; it just is. All of the time. I see now that what is in front of my eyes right now is the only thing that is in front of my eyes right now. And the same is true of every single right now that there will ever be. Language doesn't really help here, does it?

I see that this is truth as truth really is. I see that everything else that I thought was real is what helps me gets through the day without getting the sack or not doing any work, but apart from these immediately practical ends, the "real" world is not real and gets in the way.

As I walked to work today, I kept looking at things saying, "Is this real?" Then each time I stopped myslef and said, "STOP THINKING ABOUT IT!" I see that the moment I start thinking about it or trying to rationalise it or explain it, I am off down the wrong path. As you say, the only thing that is necessary is to see!

[neeeel]

Hey

Actually, I am beginning to see things now. Where I have been going wrong is in trying to find the self in order to say to it that it is not real. Now I see.

Haha. Yes, trying to find something that isnt there, and then telling it it doesnt exist, does seem to be a fruitless venture.

There is no self. There is no anything. There is experience. No more.

this is basically it. Although, you need to be careful not to fall into nihilism or a "dark night" when you say "there is no anything". There clearly seems to be something, although its not a thing, and its not a you.
Are you clear that, although there is only experience, there is no experiencer?

The key to me has been to abandon the hunt for no-self; instead, to see that instead of looking for things that don't exist (!), I should be looking at everything that does. You are probably hitting your head and screaming, "THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN TELLING YOU!!!"

Well yes, you look at everything that does exist, to see if there is a self somewhere in all that. If you dont find one, then you can at the very least question the beliefs in a self. Do you find a self? Have you ever seen, smelt, tasted or heard a self? Outside of thoughts about a self, have you ever found a self?

What does exist? Everything.Kind of. Because it doesn't really exist; it just is. All of the time. I see now that what is in front of my eyes right now is the only thing that is in front of my eyes right now. And the same is true of every single right now that there will ever be. Language doesn't really help here, does it?

Yes, it just is.
no , language makes things difficult. Yes, what is in front of your eyes right now is the only thing that is in front of your eyes right now. Even memories of past, and thoughts of future, are happening right now.
Take a look at your hand. Without thoughts about this hand, what is it? Without thoughts, is it your hand? Without thoughts, is it different from the monitor, or the walls, or the trees, or the sky?
without thoughts, notice the veins, the hairs, the skin, the texture. the shapes and the colours. Notice how it moves effortlessly.
And then, with thoughts. Wow, so many stories about this hand. Notice the labels. My hand. I made it move.

As I walked to work today, I kept looking at things saying, "Is this real?" Then each time I stopped myslef and said, "STOP THINKING ABOUT IT!" I see that the moment I start thinking about it or trying to rationalise it or explain it, I am off down the wrong path. As you say, the only thing that is necessary is to see!

And can you stop thinking about it? You dont need to try to stop these thoughts, or feel guilty or bad or like you have failed if thoughts come up. Just keep looking and noticing.

I feel like you are right on the edge of it here, and just need one final push :)

Maybe give me a bit of a rant about where you are with all this, how you are seeing things in every day life, what has changed, if anything. What hasnt changed, if anything. What is clear, and what is unclear. As much as you want to write.

[Ann O'Nymous]

Maybe give me a bit of a rant about where you are with all this, how you are seeing things in every day life, what has changed, if anything. What hasnt changed, if anything. What is clear, and what is unclear. As much as you want to write.

Ha! Where am I? I'm here. As in "I + am + here": here is me! I am part of here.

What has changed? Nothing has changed. The world still is; they're still digging up the road; the trains are still crowded in the morning; bills still have to be paid; kids still need to be jostled into the car in the morning. But there's a satisfaction in knowing...seeing...that it is all this. There's no more to it than is to be seen in any single moment. There's no need to find the purpose; no need to improve; no need to strive to understand; no need to judge any of it. It all just is.

This morning, I sat down to do my increasingly habitual morning meditation. I didn't label, I didn't think "breathing in-breathing out". Instead, I noted, "Just here," when I breathed in and "Just now" when I breathed out. When my mind wandered, I noted, "Just here, just now." There was no sense of failure, no sense of not achieving. There was a sense of being just here and just now.

Walking to work, I went past the same site where the road is being dug up. Yesterday, I looked at the people working there and asked myself, "How are they me? How are we the hole? How is the drill the same as the tarmac?" Today I looked at the people working there and saw people working there, people walking past there, my legs, my breathing, my mind, the sky, the buildings, heard the traffic, heard the conversations. Now that I am here, I am also there. There's no mystery; no esoterica; no zen puzzles; no struggles to make it all fit. There is now. There is here.

Here and now also have thoughts. "If it is all an illusion, what does it mean to speak of a time when I couldn't see this? Time is an artificial construct even to people who don't see the here and now. So, if it's artificial, why am I still speaking of it now that I claim to be able to see?" And then I see that this is just a thought. It doesn't matter if there was a me who didn't see because here and now there is a me who can see. Wait!!! There is a me??? Well...inasmuch as there is something. If you were to ask me what is the me...how does it differ from anything else...there's no answer. All I can honestly say about me is that it is here and it is now. The Me who is here is not the Me who meditated; is not the me who started typing all of this. What do you mean: "Not the Me"?? I just mean that there's no point in asking this sort of question. Is the Self real? What does it matter? It can't be seen; it can't be found; it can't be drawn; it can't be described; it can't be trusted; its actions are arbitrary; its behaviour can't be predicted. What is real is here and now.

Here and now there are not good things happening, nor bad things happening. Here and now there is nothing more than here and now. Things happen, things don't happen. Whatever happens, it is still no more than here and now. Before, I would have finished with a question Is this right? Have I understood it? Not this time!

[neeeel]

What has changed? Nothing has changed. The world still is; they're still digging up the road; the trains are still crowded in the morning; bills still have to be paid; kids still need to be jostled into the car in the morning. But there's a satisfaction in knowing...seeing...that it is all this. There's no more to it than is to be seen in any single moment. There's no need to find the purpose; no need to improve; no need to strive to understand; no need to judge any of it. It all just is.

Yes, it just is. And yet, thoughts of improvement come up, attempts to understand happen, judging thoughts arise. uncontrolled, automatic. And these are all THIS too.

Walking to work, I went past the same site where the road is being dug up. Yesterday, I looked at the people working there and asked myself, "How are they me? How are we the hole? How is the drill the same as the tarmac?" Today I looked at the people working there and saw people working there, people walking past there, my legs, my breathing, my mind, the sky, the buildings, heard the traffic, heard the conversations.

Yes, all the questions are just thoughts, the mind trying to understand, thought fluff. Perhaps useful, perhaps not, but always stories about what is actually happening.

Now that I am here, I am also there. There's no mystery; no esoterica; no zen puzzles; no struggles to make it all fit. There is now. There is here.

Are you here? I realise this might just be a limitation in language, in that English requires a subject and object, but I want to make sure its clear. Are you here? Are you also the other people, the walls the sky?

Here and now there are not good things happening, nor bad things happening. Here and now there is nothing more than here and now. Things happen, things don't happen. Whatever happens, it is still no more than here and now.

Yes, good and bad are judgements, and exist only in the region of thought. What happens, happens.

So, what now? Do you feel that you have seen through the belief in a separate self? Are you clear on everything? Would you like to answer the final confirmation questions?

[Ann O'Nymous]

Are you here? I realise this might just be a limitation in language, in that English requires a subject and object, but I want to make sure its clear. Are you here? Are you also the other people, the walls the sky?

I am here!

In the sense that this is the answer to the question, "What [not who] are you?"

But before you worry, "I" is a meaningless word. The Beatles were right:

I am you and you are me and he is she and we are all together

I think I would like to answer the final confirmation questions! Thank you so much for helping me with this.

[neeeel]

hey, sorry for the delay. Heres the questions

1) Is there a separate entity, a me, a self, an I, anywhere , in any way, shape or form? Was there ever?

2)Explain in detail what the illusion of self is, 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 different from before you started this process? Please report from the last few days, with examples from your own experience.

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?

[Ann O'Nymous]

Hi
I've been holding off replying until I have a bit if experience to reflect back on. Here are my answers.

1) Is there a separate entity, a me, a self, an I, anywhere , in any way, shape or form? Was there ever?

This one is the easiest to answer! And the answer is No. A resounding no. Looking from whatever angle, there is nothing that can be defined as self. There is no shapeless self, no formless self, no legion of selves, no self...just an illusory self. One that comes into being in the mind.

2)Explain in detail what the illusion of self is, and how it works, from your own experience, Describe it fully as you see it now.

An entity has a body; the body has organs; the organs have senses. A by-product of tueste combines elementos and The environment gives rise to a consciousness. The consciousness thinks itself unique. It has experiences. These experiences may very well be unique. The unique experiences create a sense of apartness. Being apart, the consciousness sees everything else as separate and creates an identity for itself. Self arises.

As I see it now, I see that there is no self. Just as you cannot slide down a rainbow or see the back of a talking head on the TV. The rainbow isn't there; the head doesn't have a back.

The world is real. This body is real. Touch, taste, thought, sight, hearing...all real. But the combination of world, sense and organ is not real. Just an attempt by mind to make sense of the data the senses are receiving.

3) How does it feel to see this.What is different from before you started this process? Please report from the last few days, with examples from your own experience

.
I'm not sure how to answer how it feels. Sometimes, it fills me with energy; other times it seems so obvious that it's hard to see how I ever didn't see it. All the time, the instructions were literal! You just have to look and see.

What's different? Nothing is really different. Everything is as it was. Or perhaps it is better to say that everything is as it is!

4) What was the last bit that pushed you over, made you look?

Alongside all of our discussions, I was reading Steve Hagen's books about Zen Buddhism. They probably helped a lot. I sat down to meditate and got that there was no enlightenment, there was no purpose to my meditation, there was no Buddha, there was no way. There was here...there was now. That was all I could know. The rest was just a product of my thoughts. Things come, things go. But here is always here; now is always now.

Your shrugging off my need to "understand" helped me to see that I didn't need to understand. I just needed to see! All of a sudden, I began to look at your words and SEE what you were saying.

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

.
No. I don't decide, intend, choose or control. There are no "events in life". Things happen. I didn't decide when to answer your questions; a time came when I began to answer them. I didn't choose to answer your questions. If I was to say, "aha! But I could have chosen not to answer them!" I would be talking about a hypothetical time; a time that wasn't real. What is real? Here. now. And what am I doing? Answering the questions! The rest is just thought, and while thoughts may be real, the contents aren't.

6) anything to add?

That I'm really grateful. That I see it and that seeing is good! Mind keeps interfering, but mind does! This is good. In fact, it is neither good nor bad. It is.

[neeeel]

Hey, I have a few more clarifying questions to some of what you posted

An entity has a body;

Can you expand on this a little more?

the body has organs;

Does a body have organs? I guess if you are using "has" in an everyday sense, then yes, it does. But in what way is the body separate from the organs?

the organs have senses.

Do organs have senses? Is it the eyes that see? is it the ears that hear?

A by-product of tueste combines elementos and The environment gives rise to a consciousness.

Is this anything more than speculation? Can you find "consciousness" anywhere outside of thought?

The consciousness thinks itself unique. It has experiences. These experiences may very well be unique. The unique experiences create a sense of apartness. Being apart, the consciousness sees everything else as separate and creates an identity for itself.

does consciousness think? Is consciousness producing the thoughts?

Does consciousness see everything else as separate? How does that work?

Self arises.

Does self arise?

[Ann O'Nymous]

Well...you're right. Language has its limitations. Really, all is. That's probably the easiest way to answer it all.

What I mean is that there is a mass of flesh and bone that is labelled with my name.

There are thoughts. The thoughts seem like reality, but they are not. They are just thoughts.

What produces the thoughts? Nothing produces the thoughts. The thoughts are produced.

Thought is; thought thinks Self; thought thinks that everything else is Other.