Ready for this

Welcome to the main forum. When you are ready to start a conversation, register and once your application is processed a guide will come to talk to you.
This is one-on-one style forum, one thread per green member.
User avatar
rubyjack
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2024 4:24 pm

Re: Ready for this

Postby rubyjack » Fri Mar 08, 2024 12:03 pm

[W]hat is your DE when you read this question? from your memory :)
An internal chuckle--DE pleasant contraction of cheeks, outbreath, Lightness in face and forehead.
Were you able to find and feel [Ruby]in a direct way like the other parts of your body? Where is it?
No. Nowhere
What did you find? Something? Anything? Nothing?
initially attention went to eye area, behind eyes and in seeing, and this dissolved immediately into sensation of contraction in eyelids, muscles under eyes, and forehead. Not Ruby, just sensation.
What sensations did you feel in your body that identified "Ruby” (If any). Tell me what you experienced and found, by way of direct experience.
In one sense everything was "Ruby" - awareness of familiarity of sensations (familiarity isn't the right word because it implies past memory, it's more like a unity of the whole package) But the package is made up of only sensations, so is not anything that can be called a separate Ruby. They don't "add up".
1) How many things do you find? Are there two things (hand and desk) or is there one thing – sensation?
Only sensation
2) Can a ‘feeler’ be found in 'what is being felt'?
no. Hand is only a thought/image/map
3) Do you notice 'one thing feeling another thing'? Or is there just 'a sensation'? /quote]
Just sensation
4) Do you find an 'I', a body, a hand 'feeling' . . . or is there just 'a sensation'? What do you find?
No. Just sensation
Can an INHERENT FEELER be found? Would anything that is suggested as the feeler, be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?
No--just thoughts

Unrelated question: is there any way to turn off the spelling suggestions as I type?

User avatar
CarefulDog88
Posts: 393
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2023 1:04 am

Re: Ready for this

Postby CarefulDog88 » Sat Mar 09, 2024 11:26 am

Hi Ruby,
Unrelated question: is there any way to turn off the spelling suggestions as I type?
I had a look in the settings I can't find anything that turns it off. Interesting though is there an emotional response to the having the spelling suggestions come up (frustration or annoyance)? DE Look at that?
What sensations did you feel in your body that identified "Ruby” (If any). Tell me what you experienced and found, by way of direct experience.
In one sense everything was "Ruby" - awareness of familiarity of sensations (familiarity isn't the right word because it implies past memory, it's more like a unity of the whole package) But the package is made up of only sensations, so is not anything that can be called a separate Ruby. They don't "add up".
"They don't add up",is this confusion? I am unsure of what your DE is here, would you mind having another Look to clarify it for my benefit please. Is there a "Ruby" or is there only sensations or is there a package of sensations that Ruby is Identifying with as the body?

Once you have Looked and completed the Questions please try the next two exercise

Body Exercise
1. Shift between letting the arm be still and move. Several times and pay close attention.
Where does the "decision", the "command" to move or stop come from? What makes the arm move? Does a ‘you’ or a thought command the body, can you find that in direct experience?

2. Can you choose to fall asleep? Can you find the moment / point / spot or realm where you choose to fall asleep?

3. Can you choose the very content of the next thought? Can you choose willingly the next thought that will arise?

4. Can you choose the very quality (tightness, openness, vibration, hardness, contraction etc) of the physical sensation, that will arise next?

5. Can you choose the next emotion, mind state, attitude that will arise? Sit and look at what is happening. Can you find any choice - point where you willingly chose any emotion that appeared in response to a stimulus?

6. Think of a number between 1 and 20. Try to not
ice the exact point when the choice is made. Did you know what number would be chosen before it appeared?


Focus Exercise
Close your eyes and sit quietly for 10-15 minutes.
Watch what focus does.
Focus on focusing, watch attention itself.
Do you move it? Or it moves by itself?
What moves attention?
Is thinking in control of attention?
Describe what you see.
With Loving Kindness
Paul


What you long for is already constantly you.
It's simply what's happening.

User avatar
rubyjack
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2024 4:24 pm

Re: Ready for this

Postby rubyjack » Sat Mar 09, 2024 2:41 pm

I had a look in the settings I can't find anything that turns it off. Interesting though is there an emotional response to the having the spelling suggestions come up (frustration or annoyance)? DE Look at that?
I didn't ask about the settings out of annoyance. The spell suggestions come up in a black box that sometimes obscures what i am writing. It doesn't rise to the level of an emtional reaction. A little bit like wanting to take a pebble out of your shoe-you just sit down and take it out. I don't get annoyed at pebbles. Body likes walking without pebbles.
"They don't add up",is this confusion? I am unsure of what your DE is here, would you mind having another Look to clarify it for my benefit please. Is there a "Ruby" or is there only sensations or is there a package of sensations that Ruby is Identifying with as the body?
No,not confusion. I meant that they don't coalesce into anything identifyable as a"Ruby" There is no Ruby there,. There is a package of sensations that don't add up to a Ruby. It's a package of sensations that in some loose way belong together. It's the "me flavored point of view" thing. Cleary no Ruby, but a localization of experience. DE : just sensations. Thought: There's clearly no Ruby in these, so what is this mysterious localization? All the words I use for this miss the mark. Not sure how to express what the experience is.
1. Shift between letting the arm be still and move. Several times and pay close attention.
Where does the "decision", the "command" to move or stop come from? What makes the arm move? Does a ‘you’ or a thought command the body, can you find that in direct experience?
No there is no Ruby making the decision and moving the arm. I can't find a necessary connection between the thought and the moving. They coincide in time, but it's not causal.DE: the arm just moves.
2. Can you choose to fall asleep? Can you find the moment / point / spot or realm where you choose to fall asleep?
This one made me laugh. I've been exploring it for the last 50 years.
No. There is no choosing to sleep or choosing when to sleep. Sleep happens. Or doesn't.
3. Can you choose the very content of the next thought? Can you choose willingly the next thought that will arise?
No. There is no control at all over thoughts. Thoughts happen. They change, they disappear.
4. Can you choose the very quality (tightness, openness, vibration, hardness, contraction etc) of the physical sensation, that will arise next?
No. I have no control whatsoever over what physical sensation will arise next. They arise. They subside.
5. Can you choose the next emotion, mind state, attitude that will arise? Sit and look at what is happening. Can you find any choice - point where you willingly chose any emotion that appeared in response to a stimulus?
No. They arise, they subside
6. Think of a number between 1 and 20. Try to notice the exact point when the choice is made. Did you know what number would be chosen before it appeared?
The number appears and I name it. Any thought is like that--they appear and they disappear out of nothing and out of nowhere.
Close your eyes and sit quietly for 10-15 minutes.
Watch what focus does.
Focus on focusing, watch attention itself.
Do you move it? Or it moves by itself?
What moves attention?
Is thinking in control of attention?
Describe what you see.
I see thoughts coming and going on their own. There is no control over them. Sometimes they just run, like a background video. Sometimes one of them sort of 'lights up" as "I" pay attention to it. There is no control over which, or for how long, and attention may or may not stay there for a while, or move on to something else. Thinking is not in control of attention, thoughts are just the recipients of it. DE sensation that I call delight-relaxation of shoulders, belly, face, fingers, long outbreath, contraction in back of throat and behind eyes that I call laughter. Thought: I love having no control and sitting back and letting it all take care of itself,

User avatar
CarefulDog88
Posts: 393
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2023 1:04 am

Re: Ready for this

Postby CarefulDog88 » Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:00 pm

Hi Ruby,

Body likes walking without pebbles
Can You describe with DE 'This body' that you refer to in this statement, "body likes walking without pebbles".

Is there a separate autonomous body that likes walking without pebbles?
Is the Body, the experiencer of the sensations?
Thought: I love having no control and sitting back and letting it all take care of itself,
Is there a separate autonomous experiencer sitting back and letting it all take care of itself?

Is there an experiencer of this Love?


Please sit with this next question and answer when 100% clear.
Is it necessary for the existence of an experiencer and the experience for the experiencing to happen?

You have mentioned this "me' being taken for granted", a "me flavour", in the body without thought labeling describe this please?


Taking me for granted -In the body without thought, there isn't a separate me, so I can't describe it from there.

Me flavored point of view--not the same thing. Dropping down into "no separate self" experience there's still something here. Some localness. more of a vantage point than an entity. Based in body. That sensation like movement (breath) is somewhere. that sensation of touch (hand to chin) is somewhere. That those somewheres are the same. It's eluding words, although I suppose you will just get me to try again.
Haha Ruby, no we don't have to do it again, but we do have to look closer here.
This "vantage point" describe this with DE please without using any thought labeling and without any memory, .

When these questions have been completed, lets try this exercise please.
With Loving Kindness
Paul


What you long for is already constantly you.
It's simply what's happening.

User avatar
CarefulDog88
Posts: 393
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2023 1:04 am

Re: Ready for this

Postby CarefulDog88 » Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:01 pm

Please follow each step, don't leave out any. Take your time. Don't move to the next step until the previous one is clearly seen. Repeat the exercise several times.

Stand in front of a bigger mirror.

(1) First, close the eyes and feel the sensations labelled ‘body’.

(2) Then open the eyes and look into the mirror while still paying attention to the sensations.
Is there any connection between the felt sensations and the image in the mirror?
Or just thoughts (and/or mental images) suggest that there is?


(3) While still paying attention to the sensations move one hand and observe the movement from the mirror.
Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and image of movement in the mirror?

(4) Now do the same movement with the hand, but this time look at the hand directly, not from the mirror.
Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and the image ‘of movement’?
Or only thoughts suggest it?


(5) Now, pay attention only to the image in the mirror.
Does the image by itself suggest in any way that is ‘you’ or ‘your body’?
Does the image itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘body’ at all?
Or are there only colours and shapes?


(6) Where the mirror ends, some parts of the body (probably legs) cannot be seen.
Just by the image in the mirror, is there any ‘knowledge’ that there must be legs, or only thoughts and mental images suggest so?

(7) Now turn away from the mirror and look forward (don’t look directly to any body parts).
Is there a ‘body’ anywhere when all thoughts and images are ignored, or are there only sensations?

(8) Start to walk slowly.

Is there a ‘body walking’, or are there only sensations?

Is there actual experience of ‘walking’ at all?


Or just THOUGHTS ABOUT ‘walking’?

Can such a thing as ‘body’ be found OR just THOUGHTS ABOUT a ‘body’?
Can such a thing as ‘walking’ be found?

(9) Are the sensations localized in space, like ‘going through the room’; OR is there only an image/images that is/are labelled ‘room’ and appearing sensations without any location?
With Loving Kindness
Paul


What you long for is already constantly you.
It's simply what's happening.

User avatar
rubyjack
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2024 4:24 pm

Re: Ready for this

Postby rubyjack » Sun Mar 10, 2024 8:47 pm

This is a lot and may take me more than a day to get to it all. Just so you know.

User avatar
CarefulDog88
Posts: 393
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2023 1:04 am

Re: Ready for this

Postby CarefulDog88 » Sun Mar 10, 2024 10:55 pm

Hi Ruby,
Of course take your time as you need, its not about quantity it's about the quality of the Looking.
With Loving Kindness
Paul


What you long for is already constantly you.
It's simply what's happening.

User avatar
rubyjack
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2024 4:24 pm

Re: Ready for this

Postby rubyjack » Mon Mar 11, 2024 10:50 am

Is there any connection between the felt sensations and the image in the mirror? Or just thoughts (and/or mental images) suggest that there is?
No there isn't any connection.
Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and image of movement in the mirror?
No, they are not connected. It's like they are in separate universes.

User avatar
rubyjack
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2024 4:24 pm

Re: Ready for this

Postby rubyjack » Mon Mar 11, 2024 12:09 pm

Can You describe with DE 'This body' that you refer to in this statement, "body likes walking without pebbles".
I used the word body to make a distinction between thought and experience, to make clear that there was no emotional reaction/annoyance involved, just spontaneous experience. Body only in the sense that there is something here, something alive, I have no idea what, taking care of its own business e.g. hunger happens. Peeing happens. sleeping happens. I don't have a direct experience of the body doing this, only of the actions themselves. So the DE is fingers pressure on keys, sound of clicking keys, eyes moving over marks on page, black box in front of marks. Thought: this would be easier if I could see the marks. thought: ask later if there is a way to remove black box. Fingers hitting keys, clicking, etc.
Is there a separate autonomous body that likes walking without pebbles? Is the Body, the experiencer of the sensations?
I have no idea. something is alive, experiencing happens. Isn't that the mystery.

I
s there a separate autonomous experiencer sitting back and letting it all take care of itself?
No, just a thought "isn't this lovely, not controlling.
Is there an experiencer of this Love?
NO, just a thought and a sensation of relaxation and joy.
Is it necessary for the existence of an experiencer and the experience for the experiencing to happen?
Could you make the question clearer? I don't quite get the meaning from the sentence structure. The answer to what I think you mean is no, an experiencer isn't necessary. That all this experiencing is happening is the great mystery.
This "vantage point" describe this with DE please without using any thought labeling and without any memory, .
It comes out the same. thoughts happening. sensations happening, seeing happening. a very subtle sense of localness. This is a subtle identification, but persists. That there is a "here".

User avatar
rubyjack
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2024 4:24 pm

Re: Ready for this

Postby rubyjack » Mon Mar 11, 2024 12:10 pm

This clunky website posted half a reply on its own--here is the rest.
Does the image by itself suggest in any way that is ‘you’ or ‘your body’? Does the image itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘body’ at all? Or are there only colours and shapes?
No, there are only colors and shapes.
Just by the image in the mirror, is there any ‘knowledge’ that there must be legs, or only thoughts and mental images suggest so?
No, none whatsoever. only thought compared to mental image.
Is there a ‘body walking’, or are there only sensations?
Only sensations,
Is there actual experience of ‘walking’ at all?
There are experiences of pressure, motion, cool on face, changing sensation is hops, knees and shoulders, that I label walking with a thought.
Can such a thing as ‘body’ be found OR just THOUGHTS ABOUT a ‘body’? Can such a thing as ‘walking’ be found?
No-those are thought constructions made by aggregating experiences and giving them a name and a meaning
(9) Are the sensations localized in space, like ‘going through the room’; OR is there only an image/images
that is/are labelled ‘room’ and appearing sensations without any location?
There is a sense of location, but it's not labeled "in the room" or "through this space". More like the sensations are related to each other and so create a "space". It's not even a location, really, not in the conventional terms of 3d space. Here we go again--more like a point of view.

User avatar
CarefulDog88
Posts: 393
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2023 1:04 am

Re: Ready for this

Postby CarefulDog88 » Tue Mar 12, 2024 1:33 am

Hi Ruby,
Is it necessary for the existence of an experiencer and the experience for the experiencing to happen?
Could you make the question clearer? I don't quite get the meaning from the sentence structure. The answer to what I think you mean is no, an experiencer isn't necessary. That all this experiencing is happening is the great mystery.

Apologies for the confusing phrasing of the question, but yes this is what the question was trying to ask.

Lets explore. Please answer all questions without going into memory or thought and only when you are 100% clear.

I pulled this from your introduction.
LU is focused guiding for seeing there is no real, inherent 'self' - what do you understand by this?
This is self evident to me, but I still function as though there were a "me" and there is no other language for it. Thoughts mysteriously arise, I see that no one is in charge. A mammal intertwined with the whole system of earth responding as mammals do. And at the same time, I fall back into identification with my mundane lovely life.
Is there an expectation that the 'me' should be something different to what is and function differently to what it is?

If there is a sense of "me" does that mean that the sense of "me" verifies there is a "me"?

Sense can be manufactured just like if you take a drug and have a differed sense of something or you can be in a room and put on rose colored glasses you will sense it differently.

If there is a sense of 'me', will there be a sense of free will?

If you relax into this it will make sense, pardon the pun, if not let me know and I will try to rephrase it.
I'm paraphrasing, Ramana Mahashi indicated that thought cannot destroy thought - the same way that the 'me' cannot destroy the 'me' or the 'self' cannot destroy the 'self'. To come at this we need to see what is negated, not what is gained but what this is not. If we ask the question to what is not, then the what is not will never be able to see, what it isn't. This sounds convoluted, but sit with it and see what comes up .

Last question for today, Is there a 'me', a sense of "me" or a sense of anything that is experiencing, here (now)?
With Loving Kindness
Paul


What you long for is already constantly you.
It's simply what's happening.

User avatar
rubyjack
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2024 4:24 pm

Re: Ready for this

Postby rubyjack » Tue Mar 12, 2024 3:01 pm

Is there an expectation that the 'me' should be something different to what is and function differently to what it is?
There is no me. So the sense of me can function any way it wants to, It’s irrelevant. My expectation is that “my” relationship to it will change. That I will “know” there is no me as the default “truth”, rather than only sometimes.
If there is a sense of "me" does that mean that the sense of "me" verifies there is a "me"?
no.
If there is a sense of 'me', will there be a sense of free will?
There is an illusion of “me” that sometimes has an illusion of free will. It also has an experience that there is no free will, so there is an illusion of a “me” with no free will. That is, There is a sense of me that can have a sense of no free will that “I” enjoy. When I peel it back and back, there is still this subtle sense of locality, that there is a "here" (me) that has or has not free will.
Last question for today, Is there a 'me', a sense of "me" or a sense of anything that is experiencing, here (now)?/quote]
Yes. There is this pesky sense of locality. Clearly I can't think or talk myself out of it. In those moments when it isn't there, it doesn't come up as either there or not there. I am in the no me" mode, and then am pulled back into self by having to answer these questions in words, engaging thought.

User avatar
rubyjack
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2024 4:24 pm

Re: Ready for this

Postby rubyjack » Tue Mar 12, 2024 6:21 pm

Is it ok to write what isn't a direct answer to a question?
An interesting thing happened today, relevant to this thread.
I was experiencing sensations of my feet, and asking who or what is aware of them. Came first to the image of being in my head looking down at feet-which has been a big part of my "localness" problem) and I was able for the first time to totally separate the image from the sensation, and just got the sensation alone, non local, just happening. Then I went to the image itself, and could "see" it as belonging there in the smoky insubstantial realm of "just a thought". So the next question was, if no one is imagining and no on is touching/sensing, what's here? Nothing. which I couldn't seem to resist imaging as a dark void, but quickly relegated that to the realm of thought. so, nothing. is nothing local? well, in a way that pesky thing is still there, but it's much easier to recognize as just thought. I think there is an even subtler sense of localness, but this is as far as I got this morning. This is not new, but so much clearer.

User avatar
rubyjack
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2024 4:24 pm

Re: Ready for this

Postby rubyjack » Wed Mar 13, 2024 12:11 am

Is it ok to write what isn't a direct answer to a question?
An interesting thing happened today, relevant to this thread.
I was experiencing sensations of my feet, and asking who or what is aware of them. Came first to the image of being in my head looking down at feet-which has been a big part of my "localness" problem) and I was able for the first time to totally separate the image from the sensation, and just got the sensation alone, non local, just happening. Then I went to the image itself, and could "see" it as belonging there in the smoky insubstantial realm of "just a thought". So the next question was, if no one is imagining and no on is touching/sensing, what's here? Nothing. which I couldn't seem to resist imaging as a dark void, but quickly relegated that to the realm of thought. so, nothing. is nothing local? well, in a way that pesky thing is still there, but it's much easier to recognize as just thought. I think there is an even subtler sense of localness, but this is as far as I got this morning. This is not new, but so much clearer.

User avatar
CarefulDog88
Posts: 393
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2023 1:04 am

Re: Ready for this

Postby CarefulDog88 » Wed Mar 13, 2024 10:54 am

Hi Ruby,
Is it ok to write what isn't a direct answer to a question?
Of course, if it is your direct experience, and what you have written is, that's why we are here to explore with DE.
so nothing, is nothing local?
Wonderful looking, Now lets look and if you can with direct experience answer your own question. Is nothing local?
That I will “know” there is no me as the default “truth”, rather than only sometimes.
Lets Look at 'Non Duality' - Non means Not and Duality means two, together it means Not Two.
Can it be the experience of a default no me versus the experience of something else?

There is only Being, the experiencing, the verbing of life, not the noun (experience), the seeing, the hearing, the feeling (not emotional feeling).

This is not new, but so much clearer.
How can it be 'new', there is only what you always are.

If you have the impulse to watch the video I linked below, its interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-51TQCaGH6k

Lets do an exercise:

Nature Exercise

Go out into nature and spend some time watching the movement of the whole. See how clouds move, trees swing, leaves wiggle, grass moves, insects, birds - all move all the time.

Then move focus to sensations and see how they too are in constant motion, thoughts come and go, sounds, colours, sensations come and go.

Notice that everything is part of one movement.

Then close your eyes and see if there is a line between you and out there, between you and life itself. If yes, where is the boundary?

Is there an inside and an outside of Life?

Is there something which is not included in the movement of the whole?

Is there a witness that is watching life happening from a distance? Is witnessing part of the one movement too?

Is there anything which is not just happening?


Go out, come back and let me know what you found.
With Loving Kindness
Paul


What you long for is already constantly you.
It's simply what's happening.


Return to “THE GATE”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 78 guests