Living without a centre

[poppyseed]

Hi Ken

I don't mind but maybe I can give more pointers if you tell me "where you are" at the momemt

Love
Rali

[ZenKen]

Hello Rali, this is where I am at...I am going further with the last two questions in particular. Thank you. I cannot find a self but the illusion seems to persist. thank you...love to you, Ken

Okay, so let's look at the idea of a me 'here' and a world, others ie objects 'out there' - is there an experiencer of experience, or are they one and the same. We'll use seeing as the means to look.

Ask yourself...what separates you from colour?

There seems to be distance between me and the red flowers in the room.

Firstly, look at whatever is in front of you.
Is it seen from the perspective of two windows (eyes), or is it like a windscreen view?

Yes windscreen view

Now zoom back inwards and try to find that which is seeing.
Is seeing separate from what’s seen, or is there just what’s seen seeingseen?

Strange! I cannot find a seer, and yet there appears to be an interface between ‘me’ inside and outside. Yet all I find when looked at are sensations.

Is there any awareness/knowing separate from experience or is there just experience - experiencingexperience?

There is an assumption that there is an experiencer separate from experience. For example, if there is thought, it is assumed that there is an experiencer/knower of them separate from them about 1 inch (2cms) away from them. However, all that is found are sensations.

Is what is seen of the body separate to what's seen, or is it part of seamless whole that is seen?

There is kind of seamless whole. It appears however that there is a ‘me’ centre that is aware of it all.

Are seeing and knowing separate or are they one and the same. Is there seeing AND colour or are they one and the same seeingcolour?

Ah yes, seeing and colour are not separate.

Is there two things present? Colour AND experience? Or are colour and experience one and the same?

They are the same.

Now look at the display before you.
When seeing it, is there any division between seeing, seer, and the seen?
Are these three separate?

It appears to be separated into 2, seeing and seer…

If yes, can you find the boundary between the three? Not an imagined, conceptual boundary, but an actual boundary that can be perceived with one or more of the senses?

This is where its a little frustrating. I cannot find an edge, a boundary between seer and seeing, however the illusion persists!
…

Does space in any way hinder, obstruct or make difficult seeingcolour?

No, not at all.

When you close your eyes and then open them and you look at the display in front of you…is not seeingcolour instant and simultaneous?

Yes, absolutely

Can you have seeing without the seen, and the seen without the seeing?

No definitely not

Can seeingseen, seeingcolour be separate at any time?

No certainly not

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.
Remember!
“seems like”/”feels like” = thought content
Nothing in DE is “seems like” – it’s either here or not
Keep the focus of attention on the sense of self and inquire:
Does the sense of self have a location?

Head - behind the eyes.

Does the sense of self have a shape or a size?

It’s assumed to be circular but when looked at there is nothing there apart from sensations.

Does the sense of self say or communicate anything?

This was a unique moment…I just realised the ‘me’ or ‘self’ even though it seems to says a lot, it doesn’t have a mouth. Put another way, it appears to say an awful lot, in fact never shuts up, but they are only thoughts.

If the answer is yes, how does the sense do this exactly?

Does the sense of self have any characteristics or attributes?

No, there is an assumption that it has but when looked at all I find are sensations. However, there is a feeling that ‘me’ is doing the looking.

What is the sense of self ‘made of’? An image? Sound? Taste? Smell? Sensation? Thought?
What is found?

Memory (thought), Sensation,

What discerns it, distinguishes it, filters it out from "not me", etc.?

A good question. This was interesting. When I am aware of foot (not me) for example. I explored what makes this sensation not ‘me’ and the one around head ‘me’. All I could discern was a thought (label) but I couldn’t actually see the thought label.

If and when that sense of "me" arises, what creates and/or notices it?

I was going to say I cannot say, it’s just recognised. However, I thought I would look again. I could say awareness but that is too conceptual. It seems to be created when attention alights on a thought/sensation. Which is misidentified as ‘me’. It seems to be ‘me’ that is aware so it is ‘me’ which notices.

When there is a sense of "me", and thus "not me" as well, look for what "in here" looks out at what is "out there" (i.e., "not me”)?

[poppyseed]

Hey Ken

This is where its a little frustrating. I cannot find an edge, a boundary between seer and seeing, however the illusion persists!

Keep on looking for one. There must be one if there are a seer and seeing.
Which one is more true to experience:


The illusion doesn’t have to disappear – it just looks like something else, but its true nature is seen. That is the difference between an illusion and a delusion, right? Have seen a Kanitza triangle:


This video might be helpful:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Lm3G0_ ... ex=17&t=8s

Does the sense of self have a location?

Head - behind the eyes.

Please IGNORE all thoughts and mental images of ‘head’ and just answer from actual experience. Close your eyes and take in a couple of deep breaths to settle the dust and keeping your eyes closed...
Notice what is actually present.
Is it a head, or is it just a sensation and thoughts ABOUT a head?
Without thought, how big is your head?
Without thought, does it have an inside or an outside?
Without thought, does it have a location?

Let’s follow this up with the some experiments which look at the belief that thoughts and mental images are coming from the head, somewhere around the forehead; therefore thoughts are stored in the head. This not only seems to solidify the idea that you are the thinker of thought, but that your consciousness in also stored there, and that what you are resides in a body. When we try to trace back the origin of a thought, it is often believed that it's coming from the forehead, because the attention automatically goes to the sensation of the forehead. Investigate this carefully as often as you can throughout the day. Have a very deep look here... the forehead is one place we feel the ‘sense of self’ resides, or rather, the sensation that is labelled as ‘forehead’ is believed to be one of the location of the sense of self. Close your eyes and look to see what the DE of the ‘forehead’ is. Then look at the following questions.

What is the forehead in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image (of a forehead) + thoughts about a forehead, right?

So, can a thought come from a sensation?
Can a thought come from a mental image?
Does the mental image suggest in any that it is a ‘forehead’?
Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘forehead’?
Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘me’?
Other than thought, can you find anything that suggests the sensation labelled as ‘forehead’ is a forehead or a me?

Furthermore, it's also believed that 'visual sights' are coming from the eyes, because when it's investigated the attention automatically goes to the sensation 'of the eyes', and at the same time the mental image or idea 'of the eyes' appear with it. So another sense of self is linked to the sensation 'of the eyes'.

What are the eyes in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image + thoughts about eyes, right?

Can sight (colour) come from a sensation?
Can sight come from an image (of the eyes)?
Can a 'mental image' come from a sensation?
Does a mental image suggest in any way that it is eyes?

If and when that sense of "me" arises, what creates and/or notices it?

I was going to say I cannot say, it’s just recognised. However, I thought I would look again. I could say awareness but that is too conceptual. It seems to be created when attention alights on a thought/sensation. Which is misidentified as ‘me’. It seems to be ‘me’ that is aware so it is ‘me’ which notices.

When there is a sense of "me", and thus "not me" as well, look for what "in here" looks out at what is "out there" (i.e., "not me”)?

Keep on playing with these two. Can a "me" spilts into "me" and "not me" and see itself?
Love
Rali

[ZenKen]

Hi Rali, quite busy today as my wife is off to Nigeria. Will report back tomorrow, thank you...Ken

[ZenKen]

Hello Rali, thius was good. I enjoyed it too. I like the triangles. Had ngt come across them before. Seeing something by its absence. See my responses below, thank you...love to you, Ken

Please IGNORE all thoughts and mental images of ‘head’ and just answer from actual experience. Close your eyes and take in a couple of deep breaths to settle the dust and keeping your eyes closed...
Notice what is actually present.
Is it a head, or is it just a sensation and thoughts ABOUT a head?

Yes just sensations

Without thought, how big is your head?

Without thought there are just sensations, no size

Without thought, does it have an inside or an outside?

It doesn’t. It occurred to me that normally it is assumed that thought is inside, a sound is outside. But they just happen in the same “place”

Without thought, does it have a location?

No, there are just sensations. Thought tries to insert a location. But in DE no size.

Let’s follow this up with the some experiments which look at the belief that thoughts and mental images are coming from the head, somewhere around the forehead; therefore thoughts are stored in the head. This not only seems to solidify the idea that you are the thinker of thought, but that your consciousness in also stored there, and that what you are resides in a body. When we try to trace back the origin of a thought, it is often believed that it's coming from the forehead, because the attention automatically goes to the sensation of the forehead. Investigate this carefully as often as you can throughout the day. Have a very deep look here... the forehead is one place we feel the ‘sense of self’ resides, or rather, the sensation that is labelled as ‘forehead’ is believed to be one of the location of the sense of self. Close your eyes and look to see what the DE of the ‘forehead’ is. Then look at the following questions.

What is the forehead in the actual experience?

A sensation + a mental image (of a forehead) + thoughts about a forehead, right?

So, can a thought come from a sensation?

No. A sensation cannot think, cannot do anything.

Can a thought come from a mental image?

Certainly not

Does the mental image suggest in any that it is a ‘forehead’?

No, label ‘forehead’ is slapped onto the sensation

Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘forehead’?

No

Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘me’?

I spent quite some time on this one. It is assumed the ‘me’ is around the forehead. But when investigated there are just sensations. The sense of ‘me’ shapeshifts elsewhere.

Other than thought, can you find anything that suggests the sensation
labelled as ‘forehead’ is a forehead or a me?

No, I have looked and looked and I cannot find a 'forehead' or a me

Furthermore, it's also believed that 'visual sights' are coming from the eyes, because when it's investigated the attention automatically goes to the sensation 'of the eyes', and at the same time the mental image or idea 'of the eyes' appear with it. So another sense of self is linked to the sensation 'of the eyes'.

What are the eyes in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image + thoughts about eyes, right?

Yes

Can sight (colour) come from a sensation?

No, certainly not

Can sight come from an image (of the eyes)?

No an image is seen but cannot see

Can a 'mental image' come from a sensation?

No the image may be slapped on the sensation but an image cannot come from a sensation

Does a mental image suggest in any way that it is eyes?

So obvious when you look. No it doesn’t.

🙏

[poppyseed]

Hi Ken
Good looking!

So where is this seer? It's good to remember that we can only experience see, hear, feel, taste, smell and thought. Anything not in the first five is thought. So can this seer be described with the senses – what does he look like, does he speak…?
If we use the apple example…

If you look at the 'I/me', is it actually known? Yes, sensation labelled as “I” is known, as are the thoughts ABOUT an “I”, but is an “I” actually known?

Does the label "I" contain an actual I...does it contain an actual person?
Does the label "I" itself, suggest in any way that it is an I?
Does the label "I" know anything about an I?
What does the label "I" point to? In other words, what does the word/label "I" actually refer to?
Love
Rali

[ZenKen]

Hi Rali, thank you. Family gathering day today, so will get back to you tomorrow...love to you...Ken

[ZenKen]

Hi Rali, this was so enjoyable.

So where is this seer? It's good to remember that we can only experience see, hear, feel, taste, smell and thought. Anything not in the first five is thought. So can this seer be described with the senses – what does he look like, does he speak…?

This shook the foundations. When looking for what the ‘seer’ looks like the attention went ‘back’ to find only seeing and sensations around eyes. Can a sensation see? Of course not. This was very clear for a while. The ‘clouds’ returned but it was obvious.

If we use the apple example…

If you look at the 'I/me', is it actually known? Yes, sensation labelled as “I” is known, as are the thoughts ABOUT an “I”, but is an “I” actually known?

No, all I find are sensations. These sensations are assumed to be ‘I’ until examined. I have been looking at - what makes these sensations appear to be an ‘I’? I keep exploring this.

Does the label "I" contain an actual I...does it contain an actual person?

All I find ‘behind’ the label ‘I’ are sensations and ‘internal’ sound. There is an assumption that it does but in examination it doesn’t contain anything. This seems an incredible set up!

Does the label "I" itself, suggest in any way that it is an I?

No. It seems the belief that it refers to something real is given to it…by what, I don’t know. Possibly just a learned habit.

Does the label "I" know anything about an I?

The thought “I” knows absolutely nothing. Just a noise!

What does the label "I" point to? In other words, what does the word/label "I" actually refer to?

The thought ‘I’ doesn’t even seem to refer to itself. It’s just a sound. It just hangs there.

Thank you Rali, much appreciated, love to you, Ken

[poppyseed]

Hi Ken

Thank you for your wonderful looking! I loved reading your answers

The thought ‘I’ doesn’t even seem to refer to itself. It’s just a sound. It just hangs there.

Awesome observation!

I realised we haven’t explored thoughts in more detail.

For the next exercise I want you to sit somewhere quiet and observe thoughts.
A thought appears.
In that moment is there anyone or anything which recognises the thought or is being aware of it?
Can you see anything that is separate from the thought and does the thinking?
Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear? Could you have done anything to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead? Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts?
Can you choose not to have painful, negative or fearful thoughts?
Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?

Is there anything that is responsible for the thoughts like a traffic cop saying which one to go and which one to stay? Can the flow of thoughts be changed?
Where do thoughts appear from? Where are they coming from and going to? Do they appear randomly or in a structured way? Watch like a hawk.

Write down a sequence of 5 thoughts in the order that they appear. Now check:
Could you predict the order of their appearance?
Did you know which will be the second or the fourth?
Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle? How long does that last? Test it for the fun of exploration.
It seems that thought has some logical ordered appearance, but look carefully and just notice if there is an organised sequence. Or is it just another thought that says ‘these thoughts are in sequence’ or “they take content from previous thought”, or that "one thought follows another thought"?

Are thoughts 100% true?
What are you, when you don't think about what you are?
Love
Rali

[ZenKen]

Thank you Rali, will get back to you tomorrow...love to you, Ken

[Hansen]

Hi Rali, we got guests at the moment but will get back to you tomorrow. 🙏🏼

[poppyseed]

Hi Ken or Hansen
What is happening here?
Love
Rali

[ZenKen]

Thank you Rali, please find my responses below. I really enjoyed these inquiries. Love to you, Ken

Awesome observation!

I realised we haven’t explored thoughts in more detail.

For the next exercise I want you to sit somewhere quiet and observe thoughts.
A thought appears.
In that moment is there anyone or anything which recognises the thought or is being aware of it?

I can’t find anything separate from the thought which recognises the thought. Is there a something which is aware of the thought 1inch (2cms) distance from the thought which is aware of it. NO! There is nothing separate which I can find. It seems to be aware of itself somehow.

Can you see anything that is separate from the thought and does the thinking?

This was similar to yesterdays inquiry. The question, what does the thinker separate from the thought look like. Cannot find anything. Just sensations.

Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear?

No. What is interesting is that there is a belief that ‘I’ think the thoughts. But that was seen as another thought, even though it appeared to be kind of subtle.

Could you have done anything to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead?

No, there is just a belief (thought) that ‘I’can.

Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts?

No, if I could I would have done it by now!

Can you choose not to have painful, negative or fearful thoughts?

No, they all just seem to happen.

Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?

No, certainly not.

Is there anything that is responsible for the thoughts like a traffic cop saying which one to go and which one to stay? Can the flow of thoughts be changed?

No. There is natural ‘evaporation’ of thoughts when attention sees them.
I cannot even find a mind in which they allegedly live in.

Where do thoughts appear from?

They just appear and disappear. Almost like a lighted match in a perfectly dark room. Here and gone.

Where are they coming from and going to? Do they appear randomly or in a structured way? Watch like a hawk.

They just appear…Some make sense for practical purposes but even those seem to just appear.

Write down a sequence of 5 thoughts in the order that they appear. Now check:

Character
Florentine
They were not…
Flourishing
I wish he could …

Could you predict the order of their appearance?

Absolutely not. I don’t even know what the next thought is going to be.

D

id you know which will be the second or the fourth?

Nope! Those thoughts were not ‘thought’ until there were ‘thought’. They were not hiding anywhere, they were not waiting backstage. They just appeared and disappeared.

Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle? How long does that last? Test it for the fun of exploration.

It is not possible to stop a thought appearing or not appearing. What happens, happens. The urge to stop a thought just happens too.

It seems that thought has some logical ordered appearance, but look carefully and just notice if there is an organised sequence. Or is it just another thought that says ‘these thoughts are in sequence’ or “they take content from previous thought”, or that "one thought follows another thought”?

The thoughts are just sounds. Meaning seems to be given to them. I cannot really say yet whether they are in sequence or not. What would happen if the internal dialogue turned to a language I don’t understand, maybe Chinese!!! They wouldn’t be in sequence then. So maybe that is the truth. They are not in sequence…

Are thoughts 100% true?

No, they are just pointers at best.

What are you, when you don't think about what you are?

Without thought I cannot know what I am. However, the senses are active and there is aliveness here.

Thank you Rali. 🙏

[poppyseed]

Hi Ken or Hansen

Let's address the elephant in the room. It would have been nice if you were open about the fact that you were guided already. It would have saved time and effort.
You could have also continued writing on your thread with your previous guide. What made you give up the last time?

Love
Rali

[ZenKen]

Hi Rali, I have been guided before. I wanted to begin at the beginning and not miss any steps. I was mis-diagnosed with a terminal illness (MS) which took me into a spin last time. As it happens it was twisted nerve in the neck which affected nerve signals in arms and a leg.

Sorry for the disturbance and inconvenience. I understand if you don't want to continue. Love to you, Ken