Ready to end the tyranny of the illusion

[eyeman]

Thanks John,

Nice complete answers here, I'll present this to fellow guides to take a look at and will get back to you sometime soon - depending on how busy other guides are, this may be at some point today or could take a few days.

Thanks


Mike :-)

[eyeman]

Hi again John and thanks for your patience,

A couple of guides have taken a look and have suggested we continue here in order to gain clarity on the area of Choice/Volition/Freewill. If you're happy to do so, perhaps we can look a little deeper into this as clearing up any grey areas can have a big impact however subtle the shift in belief might seem.

"the mind cannot accept that it is all happening spontaneously without volition."

"then thought believes that "I" can manipulate the thought-stream to keep the song going or maybe morph it into something else."

Regarding the above quotes:

Is there a mind in direct experience that can accept or reject?

Is there something called thought that can believe or disbelieve, or is there just thinking?

If you have the time, if you haven't seen it, here's a great talk by Sam Harris who comes from a scientific perspective on the subject of 'free-will', it's particularly good because he discusses many of the knee jerk reactions to the prospect of no freewill and a more realistic view of outcomes (eg: crime etc...).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCofmZlC72g

Mike :-)

[johnb]

Hi again John and thanks for your patience,

A couple of guides have taken a look and have suggested we continue here in order to gain clarity on the area of Choice/Volition/Freewill. If you're happy to do so, perhaps we can look a little deeper into this as clearing up any grey areas can have a big impact however subtle the shift in belief might seem.

Cool, thanks for hanging in with me.

"the mind cannot accept that it is all happening spontaneously without volition."

"then thought believes that "I" can manipulate the thought-stream to keep the song going or maybe morph it into something else."

Regarding the above quotes:

Is there a mind in direct experience that can accept or reject?

Once again you have found me out in a lie. :-) The only experience of "mind" is thinking. Accepting or rejecting are further thought labels that follow experience.

Is there something called thought that can believe or disbelieve, or is there just thinking?

There is just thinking. I cannot identify a single object called a thought - thinking occurs more like a stream.

If you have the time, if you haven't seen it, here's a great talk by Sam Harris who comes from a scientific perspective on the subject of 'free-will', it's particularly good because he discusses many of the knee jerk reactions to the prospect of no freewill and a more realistic view of outcomes (eg: crime etc...).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCofmZlC72g

Yes, excellent video with a great experiential "pick a city" exercise, similar to yours with the dog breeds (which I'd conveniently forgotten :-) ). I've just purchased the Kindle edition of his "Free Will." Funny that a book by a prominent athiest is going on my spirituality shelf. :-)

So what to do with the mental instance that sometimes arises that there is free will, choice, control, etc., even though it can never be found when looking directly at experience?

Thanks,
John

[eyeman]

Hiya John,

You clearly 'looked' and saw a great deal even before arriving here, it's quite evident in your clarity and eloquence - either that or perhaps you're an English Language Professor :-) Either way, it's all good - it's all conditions which have brought about this focus and attention to detail concerning Real vs Unreal.

Sometimes, it's a bit like a tricky puzzle, you get one bit nailed, then move onto the next bit and so on, then because the clarity in the first bits you've nailed is now a bit foggy, it's easy to start questioning something that a week or two back you 'KNEW' as a certainty, at least felt very confident in.

There's a 'place' where it all converges, where each part of the puzzle fits perfectly and the glory of realisation happens - that 'aha!' moment. This doesn't have to be just once, it can happen whenever you need it to. Thoughts narrate doubts - they're great at it, but they can only do that while there's no clarity on whether the thought content is Reality or not. Pretty much everyone I've guided here has at one point drawn a line under thoughts being seen as containing nothing real - they've been 'certain', they look at their own direct experience and see very clearly that thought content is simply 'imagining', they then strive forward with that certainty. Then a few days later, they look, and see something else that's crystal clear eg: No Thinker, Chooser or controller, they see it just happening all by itself. NEXT comes a thought arising that challenges this seeing - a 'but it really feels like there's a controller' etc... This is the point that if they try to describe what this controller is - they see that it could only be an idea or an imagining, however they've kind of forgotten their certainty that thoughts cannot be considered any basis for investigating reality. The mind or flow of thoughts tells you that another group of thoughts isn't just a group of thoughts (view), but actually something Real and exists in reality. When we look for evidence of this 'Reality' it's just not there - so the mind finds another way to convince (itself), that it really exists and so on.

This is the point where we need to return to looking and seeing if thought content is reality or just 'imaginings', once we see it and accept what we see - the whole house of cards comes tumbling down. This can happen a few times until we see it for what it is - just a process happening according to conditions.

So what to do with the mental instance that sometimes arises that there is free will, choice, control, etc., even though it can never be found when looking directly at experience?

Please give any example where this happens - perhaps as you think of it right now (try to think of something that thoughts insist it has control over - please describe the succession of thoughts and feelings (if applicable) which come up - rather than consider this too carefully, perhaps simply type as it happens if possible - lets see where this progression of thoughts leads you...

Mike :-)

[johnb]

Thanks Mike, just a quick reply here to say that I'll have the full response by tomorrow.

[johnb]

Oops - likely won't have a full response today. Taking a close look at choice/free will/control as I engage with the day's activities.

[eyeman]

No problem John, looking forward to hearing what comes up :-)

[johnb]

Hiya John,

You clearly 'looked' and saw a great deal even before arriving here, it's quite evident in your clarity and eloquence - either that or perhaps you're an English Language Professor :-)

Thanks Mike, I'll take that as a compliment :-). I do string words together for a living -- as a software developer.

There's a 'place' where it all converges, where each part of the puzzle fits perfectly and the glory of realisation happens - that 'aha!' moment. This doesn't have to be just once, it can happen whenever you need it to.

I must not have needed it to then :-). Realization seems to be arriving here in small parcels. My moments have been more like 'oh' than 'aha!'.

Thoughts narrate doubts - they're great at it, but they can only do that while there's no clarity on whether the thought content is Reality or not. Pretty much everyone I've guided here has at one point drawn a line under thoughts being seen as containing nothing real - they've been 'certain', they look at their own direct experience and see very clearly that thought content is simply 'imagining', they then strive forward with that certainty. Then a few days later, they look, and see something else that's crystal clear eg: No Thinker, Chooser or controller, they see it just happening all by itself. NEXT comes a thought arising that challenges this seeing - a 'but it really feels like there's a controller' etc... This is the point that if they try to describe what this controller is - they see that it could only be an idea or an imagining, however they've kind of forgotten their certainty that thoughts cannot be considered any basis for investigating reality. The mind or flow of thoughts tells you that another group of thoughts isn't just a group of thoughts (view), but actually something Real and exists in reality. When we look for evidence of this 'Reality' it's just not there - so the mind finds another way to convince (itself), that it really exists and so on.

Yep, that's the way it goes for me. :-)

This is the point where we need to return to looking and seeing if thought content is reality or just 'imaginings', once we see it and accept what we see - the whole house of cards comes tumbling down. This can happen a few times until we see it for what it is - just a process happening according to conditions.

A few or a few million, perhaps. :-) But yes, looking occurs often enough here to have faith in it as a remedy for the imaginings of thought. And when I look I do see it for what it is: a process happening according to conditions. Nicely put.

So what to do with the mental instance that sometimes arises that there is free will, choice, control, etc., even though it can never be found when looking directly at experience?

Please give any example where this happens - perhaps as you think of it right now (try to think of something that thoughts insist it has control over - please describe the succession of thoughts and feelings (if applicable) which come up - rather than consider this too carefully, perhaps simply type as it happens if possible - lets see where this progression of thoughts leads you...

Well that isn't going to work because when I look closely, the mental objections (I meant "insistence" not "instance") are seen for what they are, with no actual reality. :-)

I've observed the process over the last few days, and notice that the belief in the ability to choose is part of the thought-stream narrative. Taking a specific example per your suggestion, I pause writing here to consider what might come next. What will I write? Another pause. Thoughts of whether to continue with this subject or erase the paragraph and start over with a different example. Reading over what's been written to see if it could expressed more clearly. Thoughts that I need to trim this down; it's getting too detailed and verbose. Another pause. Ideas appear to mind and words appear on the screen as fingers move over the keyboard. Considering free will. Am I off topic? And so on and so forth. Thoughts come, words appear, editing occurs or not. Words like "surely I did that" or "next I'll ..." are more thoughts referring implicitly to the locus of sensing I call "me". It appears that thoughts can influence activity, but I cannot claim authorship of the thoughts themselves, which arise spontaneously from forces and causes hidden from me. When arriving after activity as "I chose that" or somesuch, the thoughts are entirely speculative, creating the illusion of having been able to 'choose' differently.

So: Free will, the ability to choose or control, is an illusion. Even when considering it logically, if the separate self is seen as an illusion created in thought, there can be no free will, because unlike perceiving (which needs no perceiver), controlling cannot occur without a controller. A separate self is required to control, but it is an illusion, and of itself, an illusion clearly has no ability to control.

[eyeman]

Hiya John,

There's a 'place' where it all converges, where each part of the puzzle fits perfectly and the glory of realisation happens - that 'aha!' moment. This doesn't have to be just once, it can happen whenever you need it to.

I must not have needed it to then :-). Realization seems to be arriving here in small parcels. My moments have been more like 'oh' than 'aha!'.

Do you see in the above that the difference between 'it all coming together with perfect clarity' and 'coming along in small parcels which make up realisation', is again simply the difference between one thought and another? If for example, we're sat in a garden or park experiencing life happening, the birds landing in trees, the wind blowing uncountable blades of grass, humans and dogs walking past, the clouds in the sky moving slowly overhead, perhaps a rabbit darting from one place to another, the sound of traffic perhaps, if we look, and see that it's all just happening without any need for any controller, it's how it's always been, so seemingly complex but yet all so natural, the legs transport us to a 'place', awareness happens and thoughts label. In this example, it's not any sort of 'thought clarity', it's a clarity without any thought or label whatsoever, thoughts continue to arise and label, but it's simply seen as another manifestation of Reality, life is experienced simply as it is, and it's observed exactly as it is - complete with thoughts narrating how it is. It's this sort of looking which pulls all of the smaller parcels into a realisation of one-ness. Thoughts cannot be stopped, but they can be seen as thoughts arising & seeing that we are not the thoughts that arise, 'John' is awareness, and the thoughts arise in awareness (made out of the same stuff), but they are a story about something other than reality, even when focusing on trying to describe reality, all they can do is point towards it. The upshot, is that to see clearly, we need to even ditch that thought which says 'yes I see it', as once we start identifying with that or any other thought - we've lost the direct connection. This is fine, the thought story takes over again exactly as it should according to conditions, it's the knowing which is known in that moment and cannot be 'un-known' which is the important bit. So in a round about way, it's about the 'space' where thoughts are seen as separate from reality, but even the thought of separate-ness is only part of the thought story.

So: Free will, the ability to choose or control, is an illusion. Even when considering it logically, if the separate self is seen as an illusion created in thought, there can be no free will, because unlike perceiving (which needs no perceiver), controlling cannot occur without a controller. A separate self is required to control, but it is an illusion, and of itself, an illusion clearly has no ability to control.

This looks pretty clear John :-) If the question now is:

Are there any doubts or obstacles standing in the way to clear 'seeing', what thoughts arise in response to this question? Perhaps thoughts may come up to challenge the idea of 'clarity', what is the response to this response and how does it progress and resolve?

Mike :-)

[johnb]

Thanks again for your comprehensive reply, Mike. I'll have a full response by Wednesday morning, hopefully tomorrow.

[johnb]

Do you see in the above that the difference between 'it all coming together with perfect clarity' and 'coming along in small parcels which make up realisation', is again simply the difference between one thought and another?

Yes all thoughts of whatever form and content just appearing here, known by the same no-thing that knows all experience. No essential difference between one thought and another, or in fact between thinking and perceiving. All of it just known.

Are there any doubts or obstacles standing in the way to clear 'seeing', what thoughts arise in response to this question? Perhaps thoughts may come up to challenge the idea of 'clarity', what is the response to this response and how does it progress and resolve?

Yes, thoughts rise up to challenge clear seeing, telling a story about This: that I can't possibly have 'gotten it', that I'm not through the Gate yet because I don't feel the same kind of certainty and clarity that is described about awakening/enlightenment/liberation. But these thoughts are recognized as just arisings in and as This/What-I-Am/Conciousness/WhateverYouWantToCallThisOpenClearRecognizingNoThing. (Chuckle)

So I would say that whatever doubts arise, when they most certainly will, can be and are resolved by just recognizing them as another arising, which seems now to be the predominant response. It is clear that all perceiving, sensing, and thinking (including believing and assuming) all have a single common point of contact in the knowing of them. It all just happens Here in this dimensionless field of knowing. Even an hours-long journey on the train of Identification Doubts is recognized, usually with a smile, as a stream of appearances, a passing show. Seemingly veiling clarity, but really arising as just another form of that clarity. This One Life appearing as myriad innumerable forms, including identification as some nebulous collection of those appearances often labeled as "I" or "me."

[eyeman]

Hiya John,

That looks like a LOT of clarity to me :-) Perhaps not the sort of clarity that's expected, but thoughts about Reality can never be Reality as you know. Nothing as such changes at all - it's the same as it's always been, thoughts labelling and narrating. When we dream, we believe the dream, we don't question if the dream is real or imagined, when we wake up, we can see that it was all just in the imagination, all the separate people who appeared in the dream, the landscape of the dream, even the physical laws within the dream, were all imagined. There was no controller in this dream, you didn't know what was coming next, who you'd be with, what they'd say to you or how you'd respond. There's no 'choice' as to whether we had what we might consider a good or a bad dream but upon awakening, somehow, it's all ok - that terrible dream and all of the suffering was just imagined and not real, just a dream after all - phew!

Have you woken up John?

Mike :-)

[johnb]

I can no longer legitimately claim that I'm not awake. :-) Except when I'm not awake. :-D

But seriously, I believe we have accomplished our objective here. There were a couple of tipping points: 1) sharpening the distinction between the actual and the imaginary, and 2) seeing that the sense of self and the veiling of "what is" occurs in the same knowing no-space as does perceiving, sensing, and thinking.

The seeking impulse has attenuated to a large extent; there is now the desire to simply deepen and abide in this not-new understanding, with the recognition that simple looking can dissolve doubts when they arise. All doubts are in the mind, and the content of thinking is not real. So doubts are moot, actually.

And speaking of doubts, I have spent some time figuratively rolling this last question over on my tongue. There is a fear that the claim "I have woken up" will be proven wrong. Also I notice some arrogance/pride coming up in the form "I got it and you don't." But these are seen as arisings, and just like their opposites, moot. Mental stories that don't apply to reality.

Teachers and guides might now be helpful to simply keep looking and seeing front and center, but they are no longer perceived to be needed to awaken. The company of friends that share this understanding is a boon, and perhaps as you suggested, the opportunity to pay back what you have guided me to in the form of guiding others to the same recognition. First though it feels like deepening and stabilizing would be helpful before reaching out to assist others.

Mike thank you so much for engaging with me. I so appreciate your patient guidance, comprehensive attention, and detailed replies. Great gratitude for your service here. This free guiding service is manna from heaven for seekers ready to be done with seeking and suffering.

With love and gratitude,
John

[johnb]

Am I ready for the aftercare group?

[eyeman]

Hiya John :-)

When you know, you know!

I'll pass this over to the fellow guides and get back to you shortly...

Love

Mike :-)