Requesting Ghata as guide

[JavaJeff]

Zen stick WHACK

Yeah yeah yeah...I know. What I meant was that I have confidence in the teachings of the Buddha and the confidence grows more and more as I look for myself. :-)

Put your fingers on the keyboard. What can be felt?
Is there a border between the fingers and the keyboard?
Is there a feeler and the felt or simply feeling?

I feel hardness. Variations in texture as the fingers move in between keys. My mind tells me there must be a border between the fingers and the keyboard. But my mind also tells me there must be a self. Relying only on the sense of touch, all I can feel is tangibles. Or should I say, all that is felt is feeling. Or even *more* precisely, all there is, is feeling - nothing is felt because I can't directly discern the difference between felt and feeler. I can't see a feeler, and I can't hear or smell or taste or feel one either.

[Ghata]

Hi Jeff,

you will probably see the Buddhist teachings in quite a different light after seeing through the Illusion of self :-)

I feel hardness. Variations in texture as the fingers move in between keys. My mind tells me there must be a border between the fingers and the keyboard. But my mind also tells me there must be a self. Relying only on the sense of touch, all I can feel is tangibles. Or should I say, all that is felt is feeling. Or even *more* precisely, all there is, is feeling - nothing is felt because I can't directly discern the difference between felt and feeler. I can't see a feeler, and I can't hear or smell or taste or feel one either.

Lovely looking, Jeff :-)

There is only feeling - even the names for sensations are already interpretations.

I made a little Video about hearing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN5VjIvTMS4

Play with it and write your answers here.

[JavaJeff]

Hi Jeff,

you will probably see the Buddhist teachings in quite a different light after seeing through the Illusion of self :-)

Yes - I am waiting for that. :-)

There is only feeling - even the names for sensations are already interpretations.

That is a good point. There is hearing. What is heard (how is that for a nice dualistic interpretation?) is identified by mind as "waves." But that is definitely an interpretation.

The first temptation is to say "I hear waves." But actually, I don't hear waves (not water waves at least). I can't *hear* water waves because the water doesn't touch the ear. I can only hear sound waves, which are air pressure fluctuations touching the ear.

And then the term "Hearing" itself is a label or a name or a concept. There is sound that hits the ear and registers in the mind. After that, labeling starts to occur. "I am hearing." "What am I hearing? Oh...it sounds like waves."

I made a little Video about hearing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN5VjIvTMS4

Play with it and write your answers here.

I still get confused about these things. "Is there a hearer and something heard? Or just hearing?" There is definitely hearing. That is about all I can really say.

[Ghata]

Hi Jeff,

nice looking :-)

I can only hear sound waves, which are air pressure fluctuations touching the ear.

What is the pure, raw sensation? Is it a "Sound wave" ? Air pressure fluctuations touching the ear? Is that your first-hand experience?

I still get confused about these things. "Is there a hearer and something heard? Or just hearing?" There is definitely hearing. That is about all I can really say.

Right, hearing is definitely there.

The question is whether there is a separate entity perceiving the sound. Can this separate entity be found in direct experience?

Check it with the sounds that are reaching the ear right now.

Sending love,
Ghata

[JavaJeff]

Hi Jeff,

nice looking :-)

I can only hear sound waves, which are air pressure fluctuations touching the ear.

What is the pure, raw sensation? Is it a "Sound wave" ? Air pressure fluctuations touching the ear? Is that your first-hand experience?

Hmmm. Sitting on back deck on warm summer morning. Sounds from soccer fields (shouting, clapping, whistles). Sounds from insects in the trees. Sounds from neighbor's air conditioning starting up.

The pure raw sensation is - what?? It is hearing. Which, I think, is sound in consciousness. But the raw sensation is hearing.

I still get confused about these things. "Is there a hearer and something heard? Or just hearing?" There is definitely hearing. That is about all I can really say.

Right, hearing is definitely there.

The question is whether there is a separate entity perceiving the sound. Can this separate entity be found in direct experience?

Check it with the sounds that are reaching the ear right now.

There is hearing. There *seems* to be something (which I like to call the self) that is taking credit for doing the hearing. But as many, many investigations and experiments before have shown, I won't be able to find this "hearer." It most likely doesn't even exist - not inherently. :-)

It always seems to happen like this:
- Hearing occurs
- "Hey! Did you hear that? That was the sound of insects in the tress. Oh by the way, *I* am the one who heard that! I am the self!"
- "Who's saying that?? Who are you? If you are the hearer, show yourself!"
- "Sorry - can't right now. I'm busy over here hearing other things now."

[Ghata]

Hi Jeff,

great humorous description of hearing :-)

There *seems* to be something (which I like to call the self) that is taking credit for doing the hearing.

Don't be satisfied with *knowing* that there isn't any self or I that hears.

Check it, get curious.
Where is this I, this self felt?
What Body sensations are connected to it?
What in the sensations says that this is the self or YOU?

Sending love,
Ghata

[JavaJeff]

Hello. Just now I have moved back from hearing to seeing as the sense of inquiry. Sitting on the back deck of my house, looking out at the trees and the vast beautiful sky beyond, what strikes me is that seeing doesn't occur "out there" where my vision is focused. Seeing is not occurring in the sky, nor at the far treeline, nor at the closer trees, nor in the space in between. Seeing is not occurring one inch away from the surface of my eye, when an insect flies close. Seeing is not even occurring right at the very surface of the eye, where little specks of dust float around if I look for them. It's "further back" than that...but how "far back" or how "deep" do I have to go to find the place where seeing occurs? Does it occur somewhere in the center of my eye? Or back behind my eyes (again, where I always seem to feel this self, this seer)?

Does it even make any sense to assume that seeing occurs in a physical place?? Seeing definitely occurs, but it only seems to occur TO awareness, no AT a place. And as far as I can tell, awareness has no center.

There is seeing. There is awareness of seeing.

As usual, self wants to assert itself and take credit for the seeing. But I can't say where self is located.

The bodily sensation that occurs when the sense of self is strong is a contraction, a concentration between the ears, behind the eyes.

Of course, self cannot be seen. I've looked. It can't be sensed by any of the other 4 senses, either. I have tried. I can't smell or taste or touch or hear self. And nothing in any of these seems to indicate or say that the self exists or is mine or is me.

Self can only be thought about.

[Ghata]

Hi Jeff,

you are playing with P.'s exercise, right?

Does it even make any sense to assume that seeing occurs in a physical place?? Seeing definitely occurs, but it only seems to occur TO awareness, no AT a place. And as far as I can tell, awareness has no center.

Lovely looking! :-)

As usual, self wants to assert itself and take credit for the seeing.

How does that happen?

The bodily sensation that occurs when the sense of self is strong is a contraction, a concentration between the ears, behind the eyes.

Tune into the strong contraction between the ears, behind the eyes.

Which body sensations are present? Which sensation tell you that this is YOU?

Sending love, Ghata

[JavaJeff]

Hi Jeff,
you are playing with P.'s exercise, right?

Yes, that's right.

As usual, self wants to assert itself and take credit for the seeing.

How does that happen?

I'm not sure! I truly don't know. How should I go about investigating this?

What I tried doing just now, is to observe something, and look to see if mind is claiming it as a self-owned observation. But it's so slippery. When I observe something benign and somewhat boring (say, a tree), then almost unconsciously, the mind labels that as "tree." It doesn't seem to assert that it is owned by the self, however. The tree just "is" in my mind. Yet if something more interesting is seen (for example, a shapely female in a dress), that is definitely claimed as "mine" - or alternatively, you could say the self asserts itself then and takes ownership of the sight. But before I even know it, I am identifying with and making up stories about "the seen" (in this case, the female), and off I go to the races...

The bodily sensation that occurs when the sense of self is strong is a contraction, a concentration between the ears, behind the eyes.

Tune into the strong contraction between the ears, behind the eyes.
Which body sensations are present? Which sensation tell you that this is YOU?

The main sensation that occurs is a perceived tightness inside the head. It's a pulling back of the ears, a tightening of the brow, a setting of the jaw, and a slight downturning of the mouth. Those are bodily reactions, however, not so much sensations...is this what you mean?

[Ghata]

Hi Jeff,

When I observe something benign and somewhat boring (say, a tree), then almost unconsciously, the mind labels that as "tree." It doesn't seem to assert that it is owned by the self, however. The tree just "is" in my mind. Yet if something more interesting is seen (for example, a shapely female in a dress), that is definitely claimed as "mine" - or alternatively, you could say the self asserts itself then and takes ownership of the sight. But before I even know it, I am identifying with and making up stories about "the seen" (in this case, the female), and off I go to the races...

Right. The labelling happens automatically.

Is the tree in the mind? What is in the mind?

How does this work, claiming a shapely female in a dress as mine? Or how does the self assert itself and take ownership of the sight. Describe the exact process.

What does this self look like? Where is it?

Sending love.

[JavaJeff]

Is the tree in the mind?

No. There is no actual tree in the mind. That much is clear. :-)

What is in the mind?

Well, thoughts. Or rather, thinking. And actually, thinking is not IN the mind. It's more like thoughts are thinking the mind. Mind would not exist without thoughts.

How does this work, claiming a shapely female in a dress as mine? Or how does the self assert itself and take ownership of the sight. Describe the exact process.

I can tell you what the Buddha would have said on this topic, about how the links of dependent origination give rise to craving, which is the link where self seems to come into play. But I have not seen this directly myself, so I cannot say.

What does this self look like?

Who would even be seeing it to say what it looks like? I truly have no idea!

Where is it?

Same as above. Well, what we are trying to do here is get "me" to see that "self" doesn't exist, so this is a futile question to answer. But even if we accept that it exists, it feels more like it "exists" as a shroud hovering around thought, memory, sensation. Not in a specific place. Investigation has shown that is is very hard, if not impossible, to pinpoint.

[Ghata]

Hi Jeff,

No. There is no actual tree in the mind. That much is clear. :-)

Right.

Well, thoughts. Or rather, thinking. And actually, thinking is not IN the mind. It's more like thoughts are thinking the mind. Mind would not exist without thoughts.

What is the actual experience of mind?
What sensations can be noticed (thoughts are part of sensations)?
In what form does the tree appear "in the mind"?

I can tell you what the Buddha would have said on this topic, about how the links of dependent origination give rise to craving, which is the link where self seems to come into play. But I have not seen this directly myself, so I cannot say.

Yes.... but I don't want to know what the Buddha said :-)

You will surely see such a lovely female shape again. Notice what happens in first-hand experience.

Same as above. Well, what we are trying to do here is get "me" to see that "self" doesn't exist, so this is a futile question to answer. But even if we accept that it exists, it feels more like it "exists" as a shroud hovering around thought, memory, sensation. Not in a specific place. Investigation has shown that is is very hard, if not impossible, to pinpoint.

For my part, I'd like to get you to see what is actually seen and what is inferred by thoughts. If you find a self, it is fine with me. If you don't find a me, it is fine with me as well.

What does your answer in the post before mean?

As usual, self wants to assert itself and take credit for the seeing.

Share what feels true.

Sending love.

[JavaJeff]

Hi Jeff,
What is the actual experience of mind?
What sensations can be noticed (thoughts are part of sensations)?
In what form does the tree appear "in the mind"?

Good morning!

If we take thoughts as part of sensation, then the actual experience of mind is always only thought. I will assume that memories are thoughts as well, so the ONLY sensation that mind can experience is thoughts.

The "tree" that occurs in the mind is simply a thought. It is not an actual tree. It is a thought about a tree.

You will surely see such a lovely female shape again. Notice what happens in first-hand experience.

Well, what happens is actually pretty predictable. As seeing is happening, a form that matches a certain preconceived notion of "attractive" comes into view. Then my attention contracts; it narrows down to see just that attractive form. Attention to all other things ceases.

Certain physiological things happen: the eyes widen a bit, the pupils dilate, and I am sure my face takes on the same intense look as a lion has when it sees prey. Probably the pulse quickens and breathing gets shallow and more rapid.

The mind then starts coming up with stories and thoughts of the future: how to prolong the seeing; what can be done to get closer; what might happen if I talked with her, etc.

No apologies. I am a man. This is the shit that happens.

For my part, I'd like to get you to see what is actually seen and what is inferred by thoughts. If you find a self, it is fine with me. If you don't find a me, it is fine with me as well.

You will, of course, be the first to receive such a report when I finally do find the self. :-)

What does your answer in the post before mean?

Which answer are you speaking of?

[Ghata]

Hi Jeff,

If we take thoughts as part of sensation, then the actual experience of mind is always only thought.

Well seen :-)

I will assume that memories are thoughts as well, so the ONLY sensation that mind can experience is thoughts.

Please don't assume anything. Have a look.

What are memories?

Does mind exist separate from thoughts and can mind experience thoughts?

What experiences thought? Is there anything/anybody, that experiences thought?

Certain physiological things happen: the eyes widen a bit, the pupils dilate, and I am sure my face takes on the same intense look as a lion has

Hey, no thoughts, no assumptions and no phantasies! I want direct experience!

Which answer are you speaking of?

The Quote was beneath the sentence, sorry. Here it is again beneath:

JavaJeff wrote:
As usual, self wants to assert itself and take credit for the seeing.

What is the self you are speaking of?

Sending love,
Ghata

[JavaJeff]

Hi Jeff,

I will assume that memories are thoughts as well, so the ONLY sensation that mind can experience is thoughts.

Please don't assume anything. Have a look.

What are memories?

Memories are thoughts. They are occurring in the present moment, but their content is about the past.

Does mind exist separate from thoughts and can mind experience thoughts?

No...mind IS thought. And actually I am starting to dislike the use of nouns...I think verbs sum up things better. Mind is thinking.

What experiences thought? Is there anything/anybody, that experiences thought?

If I look at my present experience, there is just thinking going on. No *thing* experiences thought. There is thinking. There is just thinking.

And there is this one persistent thinking-thread that thinks about all the thinking going on. It thinks about all the thoughts, and that thinking-thread has a tendency to take ownership of all the other thoughts. Or - at least it says that it is taking ownership. Since that thought is just a thought, though, how could it own anything?

Certain physiological things happen: the eyes widen a bit, the pupils dilate, and I am sure my face takes on the same intense look as a lion has

Hey, no thoughts, no assumptions and no phantasies! I want direct experience!

This IS direct experience! This is the experience of what happens when I become acutely interested in something perceived. I can experience the fact that my eyes are wide (I can feel them widening).

Which answer are you speaking of?

The Quote was beneath the sentence, sorry. Here it is again beneath:

JavaJeff wrote:
As usual, self wants to assert itself and take credit for the seeing.

What is the self you are speaking of?

Sending love,
Ghata[/quote]

It's a thought. The self is a self-referencing thought. :-) The very fact that it self-references makes it the self. But it doesn't exist in and of itself. It is not inherent.