Direct recognition of thoughts and self

All threads where seeing happens are stored here. The complete list, sorted by guide, contains all links. The archives include threads of those that came to LU already seeing as well.
You are welcome to continue your conversation with your guide here after your name is turned blue.
User avatar
Nina45
Posts: 582
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 1:42 am

Re: Direct recognition of thoughts and self

Postby Nina45 » Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:12 pm

Hi James:
I can’t find any “I” other than in thought. The thought's claim a location of ‘here’.
What can't find an "I" other than in thought? :)
Is there anything there looking for an "I"?
From memory, a thought. Also from memory, in some cases there is a sensation like a tingling on the skin.
What is memory in actual experience?
Where is this "I" that can't see?
Where is the location of the "I" exactly?
As above, on closer inspection it’s illusory.
Great! Keep looking! ;)
… hmmmm. This ‘table’... I have a sensation of a hard surface. That appears to exist.
What is it that exists exactly in actual experience?
LOOK at any object. What is it that labels the object?
A thought taking the form of words or reference to some ‘concept’ (another thought).
Great. A thought label.
What Is it that creates a story about the object?
Thought again, e.g. ownership, familiarity, feelings. Taking this further and asking what creates the thoughts… unknown. They just seem to arise on their own.
Yes! Thought, just arising.
What is the actual experience of the object?
It’s difficult to say. Thought seems to arise whether attended to or not, so the underlying ‘raw’ experience appears somewhat masked. But it seems possible to specifically bring attention to certain aspects of experience, such as edges, colours, textures etc.
Look again - is there just variation in colour?
And variation in sensation?
Most of the time “I" appears to be an identification with a separate self… though often very subtle. Claims about direct experience of the form “I see…” appear to be amongst the few cases where it’s not self referencing.
Say "I" and point at yourself. What is there?
Sensations? What exactly?

Best wishes

Nina

User avatar
duckHouse
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 10:58 am

Re: Direct recognition of thoughts and self

Postby duckHouse » Wed Jun 15, 2016 9:58 pm

I can’t find any “I” other than in thought. [...]
Is there anything there looking for an "I"?
It can only be thought that's doing the looking, which means a thought looking for a thought?!
What is memory in actual experience?
A thought on top of... nothing.
This ‘table’... I have a sensation of a hard surface. That appears to exist.
What is it that exists exactly in actual experience?
The sensation of a surface, together with colour. The ‘table’ turned out to be a label.
it seems possible to specifically bring attention to certain aspects of experience, such as edges [and] textures
Look again - is there just variation in colour? And variation in sensation?
Yes, edges and textures are labels attached to variations within direct experiences.
Say "I" and point at yourself. What is there?
Sensations? What exactly?
Vision containing a (labelled) finger. Focusing attention along the direction the finger points yields, nothing, except the sensations associated with crossed eyes.

Many thanks

James

User avatar
Nina45
Posts: 582
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 1:42 am

Re: Direct recognition of thoughts and self

Postby Nina45 » Thu Jun 16, 2016 12:24 am

Beautifully Clear James!
Here I am flying over the house eating cake and thinking about finally seeing the illusion the self!
So who is more real? "You" or Santa Claus?

Nina
Xxx

User avatar
duckHouse
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 10:58 am

Re: Direct recognition of thoughts and self

Postby duckHouse » Thu Jun 16, 2016 7:58 pm

So who is more real? "You" or Santa Claus?
Seems we are both equally fictional. Of course, "I" arose from conceptualising a bunch of direct experiences.

It still seems a challenge to bring this into the rest of life though. In particular, it's relatively easy to see this when sitting down in a quiet environment, but another to do it in the bustle of daily life without withdrawing.

Thanks

James

User avatar
Nina45
Posts: 582
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 1:42 am

Re: Direct recognition of thoughts and self

Postby Nina45 » Thu Jun 16, 2016 8:50 pm

Yes James! Habits continue. There is no magic pill to make the "I" habit disappear.

Keep looking, keep inquiring.

Here is an interesting exercise on "the body":


Sit with eyes closed for about 15 minutes.
Pay attention only to the pure sensations, without relying on thoughts or mental images:

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 clothing?
Is there a boundary between the body and the chair?

Is there an inside or an outside? If there is an inside - inside of what exactly?
If there is an outside, the outside of what exactly?

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

Look very carefully, especially with the last question. Take your time, don’t rush. You can look several times during the day while doing other things (like washing hands, showering, having a short break from work, walking, etc.) before replying.

Have some fun with it!

Very best wishes

Nina

User avatar
duckHouse
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 10:58 am

Re: Direct recognition of thoughts and self

Postby duckHouse » Fri Jun 17, 2016 10:22 pm

Wanted to let you know I'm still working with that exercise.
What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?
It seems that once thought/labels are disregarded the sensations usually associated with, say, a foot become a sort of fuzzy 'cloud' which doesn't resemble what would normally be associated with a foot. But once the foot is moved the mental label seems to return instantly.

Thanks

James

User avatar
Nina45
Posts: 582
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 1:42 am

Re: Direct recognition of thoughts and self

Postby Nina45 » Fri Jun 17, 2016 10:51 pm

Hi James,

Interesting to notice thought labels and how they are quite different from actual experience.

Looking forward to your responses to the exercise.

Nina
Xxx

User avatar
duckHouse
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 10:58 am

Re: Direct recognition of thoughts and self

Postby duckHouse » Sat Jun 18, 2016 8:48 pm

Hi Nina,

It's a fascinating one, this exercise.
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 clothing?
Is there a boundary between the body and the chair?
No. These are all concepts which I can't observe directly other than in thought. The exercise is making it remarkably clear that every time attention is turned towards sensations, a thought jumps in with a mental map of where it is and how it relates to everything else.
Is there an inside or an outside?
No inside/outside division in direct experience. There are many times where it feels like thought is screaming a commentary such as "THAT'S OVER THERE OUTSIDE ME", but the direct experience is just touch, colour, sound etc.
What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to?
A thought, which encapsulates lots of sensations within a mental model. But even that is a
What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?
When thought is stripped away it just seems like a load of 'tingling sensations'.

A question: It's starting to feel like bringing these realisations to the 'rest of life' will require an ongoing long-term effort. Could you let me know how this usually works in the LibrationUnleased format, cf. daily updates.

Many thanks

James

User avatar
Nina45
Posts: 582
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 1:42 am

Re: Direct recognition of thoughts and self

Postby Nina45 » Sat Jun 18, 2016 11:26 pm

Hi James,

There are other forums on this website where further investigation can take place. There are also an array of Facebook groups for communication and support! Indeed, in many ways this is this first step.

"The body" looks very clear! Indeed, the body is a thought label. Arms, legs, nose etc are all concepts that overlay actual experience. It is all very simple.

A couple more exercises now to let this realisation settle in:

There is a general assumption that there is a linear time that started (if started at all) somewhere very far in the past and advances to the distant future. The present moment (now) is considered to be a very small fragment of time or an event that is moving forward on this linear time, coming from the past and advancing to the future.

But is there an experience that the now is moving along the line of time?

How fast the present moment is actually moving?

How long does the now last?

Where does it start and where does it end?

When does the now exactly become the 'past'?

What is the past in the actual experience?

Please look for the answers many-many times (!!!) before replying.


And memory:
Almost everybody believes that a memory thought is referring to something that has happened.
That a memory thought is a different thought than a non-memory thought.

What is memory exactly? (from Actual Experience)

What is the memory ‘made of’?
WHEN does the memory appear?

What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘memory’ thought?

How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened?

Then, look at a thought about the future.
What is the future thought ‘made of’?

WHEN does the future thought appear?

What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘future’ thought?
How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘future’ thought refers to something that will happen?

Then let’s compare a thought about past and a thought about the future.
What is the EXACT difference between the thoughts about past and future?
If there is difference, how that difference is known exactly?

Please spend lot of time (!!!!) with EACH question… Look very carefully… Look at what actually going on and not what thoughts ..... not what thoughts say .... but what actually is
!


Good luck with these! Look to confirm what has been seen.

Very best wishes

Nina
Xxx

User avatar
duckHouse
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 10:58 am

Re: Direct recognition of thoughts and self

Postby duckHouse » Sun Jun 19, 2016 9:53 am

Great, thanks. I'll take a few days with these then report back.

J

User avatar
duckHouse
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 10:58 am

Re: Direct recognition of thoughts and self

Postby duckHouse » Tue Jun 21, 2016 12:09 pm

Here’s the results of lots of looking. The responses seem a little predictable by now, but the point is probably to keep looking and reinforce it.

TIME
is there an experience that the now is moving along the line of time? How fast the present moment is actually moving?
There’s no direct experience of ‘now’ moving. Come to think of it, I can’t find ‘now’ other than in thought. It seems to be a label for what is experienced directly. But in the interest of reasonable language it seems a fair label!
How long does the now last? Where does it start and where does it end? When does the now exactly become the 'past'?
There’s no direct experience of length, start or end of ’now'. I'm not sure the question makes sense in terms of direct experience, as though asking the question "what is the length of experience?".
What is the past in the actual experience?
A thought.

MEMORY
What is memory exactly? (from Actual Experience) What is the memory ‘made of’?
Nothing but thought/story, it would seem.
WHEN does the memory appear?
It appears ‘now’, the only possible place it could appear.
What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘memory’ thought?
Sometimes it feels like a memory thought is somehow in a 'different place’ to a general thought. I think that’s just a feeling of the eyes looking in a different direction (down and to the right). Other than that there doesn't appear to be any difference.
How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened?
Not known, other than via belief/thought. Of course, it's easy to say that on a logical level, but it's a very strong belief.
What is the future thought ‘made of’?
WHEN does the future thought appear?
What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘future’ thought?
How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘future’ thought refers to something that will happen?
As above, it’s a thought, appearing now, with essentially no difference to other thoughts, and which has another thought that labels it as ‘future'.
What is the EXACT difference between the thoughts about past and future?
If there is difference, how that difference is known exactly?
Just labels, and perhaps the strength of belief in them. E.g. “This happened” versus “This might happen”. The label associated with the former appears much stronger, but still just a thought.


Aside. Some people speak of things such as "cultivating a connection with the 'now'", or "becoming aware of 'being'". Do such practices have value within the context of this work? They sound like attempts to bring these realisations into more of everyday life.

Many thanks

James

User avatar
Nina45
Posts: 582
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 1:42 am

Re: Direct recognition of thoughts and self

Postby Nina45 » Tue Jun 21, 2016 5:09 pm

Hi James,

Brilliant looking! This is great and the time for the final questions is here. The work will go on but it feels like this particular inquiry is drawing to a close.
Aside. Some people speak of things such as "cultivating a connection with the 'now'", or "becoming aware of 'being'". Do such practices have value within the context of this work? They sound like attempts to bring these realisations into more of everyday life.
It is only possible to answer this question with more questions. It my be helpful to inquire:
What would be cultivating a connection with the "now"?
(Of course, looking is looking at "this" experience "now" so looking is the key the the whole path)
What would be becoming aware of "being"? Is there a place where sensation stops and "awareness" begins? Is "being" somehow different from experience?
(A further inquiry maybe be about not being, rather than being).

It has been such a pleasure to guide you James.
Thank you so much for your commitment to responding to the questions!

Here are the last of the clarifying 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?

Much love

Nina
Xxx

User avatar
duckHouse
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 10:58 am

Re: Direct recognition of thoughts and self

Postby duckHouse » Tue Jun 21, 2016 9:04 pm

"cultivating a connection with the 'now'", or "becoming aware of 'being'". Do such practices have value within the context of this work?
It my be helpful to inquire: What would be cultivating a connection with the "now"? [...] Is there a place where sensation stops and "awareness" begins? Is "being" somehow different from experience?
Of course! :-) How completely perfect.

I'll take a little time to properly answer the clarifying questions and get back to you.

Many thanks

J

User avatar
duckHouse
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 10:58 am

Re: Direct recognition of thoughts and self

Postby duckHouse » Thu Jun 23, 2016 1:36 pm

Hi Nina,

Here are some responses.
1) Is there a separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form? Was there ever?
No such entity exists in actual experience. It only ever existed as an illusion.
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.
The separate self:
  • isn’t a ’thing’ but a concept, built of thoughts;
  • gives the illusion of an ‘experiencer’, ‘controller’, and an 'identity’ which is ‘persistent through time’;
  • ‘personalises’ experience and appears to need protection from some ‘external world’;
  • leads to a continuous cascade of ‘self-referencing’ thoughts, all helping to sustain each other;
  • is difficult to see though until the over-emphasis of thought is recognised and dropped;
  • appears to keep returning, but is easily dropped again and again.
When the separate self started is unknown, even in ‘memory', though presumably around 2-3 years old, from watching children!
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.
In most ways things are the same, but some key differences are:
  • when thoughts are recognised they can be instantly released and may ‘float away’ at some point;
  • actual experience gets more attention as 'self’ gets less;
  • a sense of not really knowing how life works, but being comfortable with it;
  • more genuine acceptance of what arises;
  • taking things less personally;
  • there have been 'proud' thoughts, which then get recognised as thoughts, and drop away.
4) What was the last bit that pushed you over, made you look?
Without being fully conscious of it, there was frustration and resistance to looking. Trying to resolve this with more thought became stressful. Finally, with a sulky attitude, there was resignation to "just look and draw any old dumb conclusions". A moment later stress turned into a smile, as looking seemed ‘enough’.
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.
Free will, and related terms, imply some separate self which makes decisions and “might have done otherwise”. But when the separate self is dropped there is just 'what is’, and topics of authorship are recognised as just thoughts and can be let go.

For example, on some level it appears that ‘I’ am choosing what to write this, but it's also recognised that 'I’ is just a thought like any other. Both viewpoints are visible, but it can be seen that there is no ‘entity' to assume responsibility for this text.

So all that is left is direct experience, and the unimaginably complex interactions between 'things'. Well, that last bit is just a story to help answer the question ’what makes things happen', but it's hard to answer the question without reverting to concepts.

As for responsibility, there is no ‘I’ to be responsible for anything. However, if I were to go around hitting people then it would still make sense to stop me on the basis that I caused pain!
6) Anything to add?
It’s clear that this isn’t and end point, and that looking needs to be applied in many other aspect of life, as thoughts still take hold easily and gain momentum... until recognised.


Thank you so much for your guidance, it’s been a great experience.

James

User avatar
Nina45
Posts: 582
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 1:42 am

Re: Direct recognition of thoughts and self

Postby Nina45 » Thu Jun 23, 2016 3:03 pm

Great James!

I'm going to ask the other guides if they have any questions for you.This may take a day or so.

Thanks

Nina
Xxc


Return to “ARCHIVES”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 469 guests