Thread for Rip

[Rip]

Hi Hare

Rip, earlier you wrote:
"No there is not an experience of two different states, there is just DE, the present moment... Selfing can arise but reality continues to unfold at the same time whether selfing is happening or not."
Then in the previous post:
"When I look I don't see the thoughts affecting action. There are selfing thoughts, and there may be chains of thoughts, as well as feeling and sometimes stronger emotion. And there is action." Some assuming here but generally OK. Then:
"But in DE there is no link that can be seen between the thoughts and the action." 'BUT?' This suggests a "link can be seen between the thoughts and the action." in 'some state other than DE'.
If as stated earlier "reality continues to unfold whether selfing is happening or not" how can there be a 'but' between DE and...?

Ok, I didn't mean the but like that, I didn't mean that a link can be seen between thoughts and action in some other state than DE. I have never seen the link, just assumed it before this process began. What I meant is clearer without the but at all: there is no link that can be seen between the thoughts and the action.' ie 'when I look, in direct experience, rather than 'think about' experience, I don't see the link between thought and action. The but meant, 'when I look at experience instead of making assumption about experience.'

And a further couple of questions from me:

Can anything at all be observed or seen, in any way, other than through direct experience?

No, not at all. Other than direct experience there is only thought and ideas.

Can you tell me what assumptions I have made in this, quoted above:

"When I look I don't see the thoughts affecting action. There are selfing thoughts, and there may be chains of thoughts, as well as feeling and sometimes stronger emotion. And there is action." Some assuming here but...

Are chains of thought an assumption? There are thoughts that appear to give rise to other thoughts, but that cannot be seen directly either.

Can "selfing" be found, now, in direct experience? Look.

It depends what you mean by selfing, which I don't seem to be clear on yet. In this moment there is typing, looking at the screen and the room, hearing sounds. There are selfing thoughts like 'I need to get up soon' ' I will need to do this today' and there is a subtle image of the body in space. That to me is not selfing though. Selfing seems to be when I am caught up in thoughts, caught up in the habit of 'self', acting as if there is a self although the illusion has been seen.

So selfing is habit. At times there is awareness of selfing thoughts, feeling, emotion, as well as sense experience. At other times there is being caught up in selfing thoughts and emotion, not believing it but acting as if, as you have said. It seems like the difference between imagining my foot in space or actually experiencing what is there.

Rip xx




Just a reminder that experience may not appear that different as a result of this inquiry: habits, including the habit of getting caught into the content of thoughts and ideas, most likely roll on. It's about a shift in view, not an ongoing shift in experience. Like the recognition one day that Santa is just a fictional character. The view has changed: the child won't ever go back to believing that Santa is real. But they will still experience excitement, disappointment and all the usual stuff.

x H[/quote]

[Hare]

Hi Rip!

Ok, I didn't mean the but like that, I didn't mean that a link can be seen between thoughts and action in some other state than DE. I have never seen the link, just assumed it before this process began. What I meant is clearer without the but at all: there is no link that can be seen between the thoughts and the action.' ie 'when I look, in direct experience, rather than 'think about' experience, I don't see the link between thought and action. The but meant, 'when I look at experience instead of making assumption about experience.'

Thanks, will convey your response to the other guide.

Are chains of thought an assumption? There are thoughts that appear to give rise to other thoughts, but that cannot be seen directly either.

If something cannot be seen directly, it is an assumption. What else could it be? (That's a question!)

Can any process unfolding in time be seen in DE? Look, and report back.

It depends what you mean by selfing, which I don't seem to be clear on yet. In this moment there is typing, looking at the screen and the room, hearing sounds. There are selfing thoughts like 'I need to get up soon' ' I will need to do this today' and there is a subtle image of the body in space. That to me is not selfing though. Selfing seems to be when I am caught up in thoughts, caught up in the habit of 'self', acting as if there is a self although the illusion has been seen.

So selfing is habit. At times there is awareness of selfing thoughts, feeling, emotion, as well as sense experience. At other times there is being caught up in selfing thoughts and emotion, not believing it but acting as if, as you have said.

I've no argument with this, you sound clear.

It seems like the difference between imagining my foot in space or actually experiencing what is there.

YES!

So - Can "selfing" be directly experienced, in the same way as actually experiencing what is there, rather than imagining the foot? Look.

x H

[Rip]

Hi Hare

If something cannot be seen directly, it is an assumption. What else could it be?

Ok, I see that! No, there is nothing else it can be but an assumption.

Can any process unfolding in time be seen in DE? Look, and report back.

No. Only the present moment can be seen. Past and future are always assumptions.

"It seems like the difference between imagining my foot in space or actually experiencing what is there."

So - Can "selfing" be directly experienced, in the same way as actually experiencing what is there, rather than imagining the foot? Look.

No! Selfing is like imagining the foot. It can't be seen directly, only imagined. Just like the self can't be seen directly either, only imagined.

Rip xx

[Hare]

Hi Rip,

Thanks for your responses here, very clear :-)

Neither me nor the other guides have any further questions for you.

However one fellow guide mhad the following come to him in a dream:

It came to me while I was asleep that what Rip was doing in talking about 'selfing' was holding on to a belief in causality or conditionality. 'Selfing' being seen as the 'cause' of this or that.

This is a very interesting issue, much discussed amongst Buddhists - can conditionality be directly observed? Suggest you have a look at this one.

The fact that something is not observable in DE, and therefore an idea or belief, isn't a problem in itself, so long as it is seen for what it is and not assumed to be a direct perception of reality.

There are post-gate forums and facebook pages on LU that you will be able to join if you wish. This may take a day or two for the admins to arrange.

It has been a pleasure guiding you, and has been stretching, in a good way, for me!

Much appreciation,

x Hare :-)

[Rip]

Dear Hare

Thank you so much! Much appreciation from this end too - it has been amazing and I am very grateful. Challenging, especially at this end part but that really helped clarify some things, so thank you for staying with me.

Please pass my thanks onto the other guides too for their questions and comments, and especially this last mention of conditionality which is really interesting.

This is a very interesting issue, much discussed amongst Buddhists - can conditionality be directly observed? Suggest you have a look at this one.

The fact that something is not observable in DE, and therefore an idea or belief, isn't a problem in itself, so long as it is seen for what it is and not assumed to be a direct perception of reality.

That's helpful too and I will keep looking. The forums or something would be good. I am not on Facebook but that might well be good too.

Lots of love Rip xxx