Who Am I?

[Xain]

Some help for you, Andy . . .

Concentrate on what you can FIND as the answer. LOOK for what is causing it. Examine your experience.
Try to differentiate this with what you THINK is the answer (or what answer you come up with from trying to work it out 'mentally').

If there is a choice being made, A REAL choice, then there must be a chooser - Something that is making that choice - Something that is causing that to happen.
What can you find?

Xain ♥

[andylongchurch]

Hi Xain

Thanks for the pointers. In my direct experience I can certainly see thought causing things to happen. That seems undeniable. I can not find an I doing that though. I stayed with the enquiry for much of today and at times I started to see, as in at times there was a clear absence of I and stuff just happening.

Thanks Andy

[Xain]

When does the 'I' appear and do things or make choices?

Can thoughts actually cause things to happen?

Xain ♥

[andylongchurch]

Hi Xain

When does the 'I' appear and do things or make choices?

Can thoughts actually cause things to happen?

Xain ♥

I am starting to see that the I is just an idea. I can not find it as a creator of choices.

But thoughts are certainly present and direct choices. Can they make things happen? Sure. They do and why not. Of course, in the same way we handled the senses we could handle thoughts. They too are just happening. Not being done by an I. I wonder, when we talk about looking at experience, is that experience in time or in the now. The latter just is without any causation.

In recent days, since the zen stick beating, I have been very immersed in this inquiry. Almost effortlessly. As I sit in a cafe right now, I can not be found, then it jumps back in, though I am seriously starting to doubt it. I am also seeing, that on some level nothing changes as a result of this.

I will continue with the inquiry on the moving hand, as more clarity would seem to be needed.

Best wishes

Andy

[Xain]

But thoughts are certainly present and direct choices. Can they make things happen? Sure. They do and why not.

Perhaps we are not quite on the same wavelength.

In this inquiry, I am trying to find if there is an operator - A creator - A controller - A chooser.
(Usually referred to as 'I', but it need not be).

If you rest for a moment and think a thought - Any thought will do, what power does that thought have?
Can that thought actively do something? Or create something?
If the thought was of 'going to the shops', could the thought go to the shops?

But thoughts are certainly present and direct choices

Direct choices for who? What can you FIND that thoughts influence or have control over?

I wonder, when we talk about looking at experience, is that experience in time or in the now. The latter just is without any causation.

Please put aside non-dual beliefs and philosophy for this guidance.

I am also seeing, that on some level nothing changes as a result of this.

Indeed. And it's a simple inquiry - What is going to change? And for who?

I will continue with the inquiry on the moving hand, as more clarity would seem to be needed.

Sure - Don't think about what the answer is - Just do the exercise and tell me what you find.

Xain ♥

[andylongchurch]

Hi Xain

I am seeing that my last two posts from my IPAD haven't appeared here for some reason. So i will post a fresh.

Perhaps we are not quite on the same wavelength.

In this inquiry, I am trying to find if there is an operator - A creator - A controller - A chooser.
(Usually referred to as 'I', but it need not be).

If you rest for a moment and think a thought - Any thought will do, what power does that thought have?
Can that thought actively do something? Or create something?
If the thought was of 'going to the shops', could the thought go to the shops?

I understand what we are trying to do is identify if there is an inherently existent self/I, meaning an entity that has true existence from its own side. I see you are pointing me to something that I am still not seeing clearly.

A thought can not go to the shops or do anything. The implication is that the thought can not be the I. Instead it would seem to be a part of a never ending chain of cause and effect.

When I look at the experience of any choice being made, there is always in the background an intention. I guess this is a subtle thought. So is there a controller of these intentions? Of course, I can not find one. Where could it possibly be; it is not to be found in the body and if we talk of mind what can i find other than thoughts? I do seem to find an ongoing existence of consciousness so I do wonder if that is the self.

But thoughts are certainly present and direct choices

Direct choices for who? What can you FIND that thoughts influence or have control over?

Thoughts do not have direct control over anything. They seem more like a tool being used by the I (that is how it feels)

The moving hand exercise: I can not find an I that is doing that. Just because I can not find an I, does that mean there isn't one? I come back to one of your earlier posts about the I just being a position. Is the confusion between believing in an I with what actually is a position. If so, what is a position?

In conclusion, Having gone through the senses and the moving hand/choice, I can not find an actual I that is present in the experience or responsible for the experience, yet still I am experimentally far from convinced that there is no I (intellectually I have been clear on this for decades).

Best Wishes Andy

[Xain]

The implication is that the thought can not be the I. Instead it would seem to be a part of a never ending chain of cause and effect.

Would this 'chain of cause and effect' be something other than another thought? Another idea or belief about what is going on?
We are looking for an 'I'. 'Cause and effect' are not something I deal with here (it's for 'further looking').

When I look at the experience of any choice being made, there is always in the background an intention.

Who or what claims or owns this intention?

Just because I can not find an I, does that mean there isn't one?

No, of course not - The 'I' could be just an idea - a belief.
Have you managed to find a real inherently existing one yet?

Yet still I am experimentally far from convinced that there is no I

What 'I' could be convinced of something?
What 'I' holds one belief that could be changed into another belief?
If there is no 'I', then this statement is fruitless. The mind running around trying to chase it's tail.

Xain ♥

[andylongchurch]

Hi Xain

thanks for speedy reply this morning. I have spent much of the day contemplating and trying to watch my experience.

Would this 'chain of cause and effect' be something other than another thought? Another idea or belief about what is going on?

No, I can see it is just more thoughts, and I can see that thoughts are not the I

Who or what claims or owns this intention?

I can not specifically find the I that has those intentions.

The I is very slippery when I try to look for it. Mainly I just see thoughts, some of which are memories, though there is a felt sense too connected to the body.

No, of course not - The 'I' could be just an idea - a belief.
Have you managed to find a real inherently existing one yet?

But even with the felt sense in the body, I can not pinpoint an inherently existent I.

I can see that it is possibly just a thought/an idea. Yet, if I sit and meditate, there are thought free periods and there is still a sense of something. So I return to what if the I is the basic always there awareness? .

What 'I' could be convinced of something?
What 'I' holds one belief that could be changed into another belief?
If there is no 'I', then this statement is fruitless. The mind running around trying to chase it's tail.

Yes, this is what it feels like. The mind chasing its tail. I immediately get of sense of what you mean.

Do I get the impression that as long as I am viewing this through the I, this tail chasing dynamic inevitably continues. So instead, a view from no self (similar to noticing that in the act of seeing etc there is no I findable) is required in order to see clearly?

The sense I have right now is that my whole life has been spent assuming that there is a "me" . Even though I have questioned it in various ways, I am now starting to see that I have not really seriously doubted it somehow. Now, it is as if that assumption is being hugely questioned and there is a strong possibility that it is completely wrong. It is seeming quite possible for life to be just happening without an I.

Andy

[Xain]

The I is very slippery when I try to look for it

Is there an 'I' looking for it? Or is that just another idea as well?

But even with the felt sense in the body, I can not pinpoint an inherently existent I.

Indeed.

Yet, if I sit and meditate, there are thought free periods and there is still a sense of something.

That may be.
But a sense of something felt by what?

So instead, a view from no self (similar to noticing that in the act of seeing etc there is no I findable) is required in order to see clearly?

I don't understand what you mean 'a view from no self'.

The sense I have right now is that my whole life has been spent assuming that there is a "me"

As a description, your meaning is understood.
But what is here now that has had 'a life'?
Is 'my life' anything more than another thought?

It is seeming quite possible for life to be just happening without an I.

Indeed. It's more a question of seeing through the mind's own created illusion.

Xain ♥

[andylongchurch]

Hi Xain

Is there an 'I' looking for it? Or is that just another idea as well?

OK - I see what you mean

Yet, if I sit and meditate, there are thought free periods and there is still a sense of something.

That may be.
But a sense of something felt by what?

OK - there is just a sense of something - no I to be found actually sensing it

he sense I have right now is that my whole life has been spent assuming that there is a "me"

As a description, your meaning is understood.
But what is here now that has had 'a life'?
Is 'my life' anything more than another thought?

No my life is just another thought - I can see that

Indeed. It's more a question of seeing through the mind's own created illusion.

I am really starting to see that - to some extent. I say to some extent because i can look at these various things and see that there is no I, yet my habitual position continues to be as before - habitual belief in an I. So, I have a lot more clarity, yet ...

Andy

[Xain]

yet my habitual position continues to be as before - habitual belief in an I.

Is there an 'I' that has a habitual position?
Is there an 'I' that has habitual thoughts about an 'I'?
Is there an 'I' with habits at all?

Xain ♥

[andylongchurch]

Hi Xain

Is there an 'I' that has a habitual position?
Is there an 'I' that has habitual thoughts about an 'I'?
Is there an 'I' with habits at all?

I took the approach of just sitting for an hour and watching, to answer your questions.

Experientially, all I found are thoughts and images. So it would seem not. I am starting to get lost for words.

Andy

[Xain]

I am starting to get lost for words.

Sounds good :-)

Experientially, all I found are thoughts and images.

Great!
You no-doubt experienced a lot of thoughts relating to an 'I'.
But through our investigation so far, have you ever managed to track down a real existing 'I'?

I fully understand your comment 'I found thoughts and images' - But even here, was there an 'I' finding them?
Or could the entire process have been 'just happening'?
Could it ALL be 'just happening'?

Where is the 'I' considering what I am saying in this post?
Where is the 'I' that is going to choose/decide what to reply . . . controls the fingers on the keyboard . . . wonders if an answer is right or wrong . . .

Xain ♥

[andylongchurch]

Hi Xain

I have a very busy day so just a quick update:

I am starting to see very clearly, or better said seeing is clearer (I do not really like having to use this non dual language though)

I can see that the I watching the thoughts is just a concept.

There have been times when there was just happening without an I, though experientially it keeps on reemerging such as when there are strong emotions such as anger. If I take the time to look for the I it is seen that there is no such I, so it is still quite an effortful process.

I have not been able to track down an I and it is becoming clear that I will not do so though I can see that the process of looking is essential



Andy

[andylongchurch]

Hi Xain

Great!
You no-doubt experienced a lot of thoughts relating to an 'I'.
But through our investigation so far, have you ever managed to track down a real existing 'I'?

I fully understand your comment 'I found thoughts and images' - But even here, was there an 'I' finding them?
Or could the entire process have been 'just happening'?
Could it ALL be 'just happening'?

Where is the 'I' considering what I am saying in this post?
Where is the 'I' that is going to choose/decide what to reply . . . controls the fingers on the keyboard . . . wonders if an answer is right or wrong . . .

Xain ♥

Not finding an I. And yes, it could all just be happening.

Yesterday, there were two times when I felt very angry. I couldn't find the I in those experiences yet it certainly felt like there was an I. It made me wonder how deeply I am seeing. Of course, I am clear that no self does not mean that anger shouldn't arise. It would seem that is still arises but there is no one there to experience it.

Today, there is a simplicity to this. There is a knowing that no I can be found. Consequently there is just what there is. Stuff just happening. It seems too easy. Could this be what is pointed to all along. As you said, nothing changes. Though on some level it all changes. It is seen (on some level) that no one is experiencing anything. I say on some level because (I) am doubting that it can be this simple (though I have often heard it said that it is very simple). Who is doubting? There is just doubting. Just as there is just everthing.

Am I making any sense?

Andy