Point it out to me please!

[s-p-a-c-e]

Honestly, the lengths we go to to not give shit up. :D

OK, your gentle (!) nudging here helped.

When first encountered, the idea of "no free will" rubs one the wrong way because it's interpreted to mean no choice. But "we" apparently make choices all the time. I'm on an airline and they give me a choice of chicken or fish. Now, I like fish but right now I'm not in the mood for it, so I pick chicken. See, there's free will! I'm not a robot!

But... what picked what "I" was in the mood for? Did an "I" choose the mood?

It's more accurate to say that if there's an I, it is just observing choice operating. "I" never pick my preferences in music, food, people, sexual orientation, etc. The preferences are just there, from genetics, past experience, conditioning, etc. A situation where choice is required appears, options are weighed via feeling preferences (which I don't choose) or thinking (with thoughts I don't create), and a choice is made. Actually, no I is required.

It feels dangerous to throw out the "I" but there's a way to tiptoe in. You can say "Only for the next hour, I'm going to live as if there's no I, and see if everything falls apart". And it doesn't. And actually, life is easier and there's just less "friction" during that hour. So you decide to try it for another hour...

So, does the hand lift when "I" intend it to? No. You sit there and at some point an impulse appears that now is the time to lift (via a thought or feeling, doesn't matter) and you lift it then. It feels like free will because you can lift when the impulse strikes. But ultimately, YOU don't pick when the impulse strikes.''

"No free will" sounds miserable when first encountered, because it's interpreted to mean you couldn't satisfy your impulses. Actually it just means you don't create the impulses, the preferences that determine the response to them, nor the time when they appear.

We really really really want to be able to observe an 'I'.
Otherwise, it's just not fair.
I mean, I don't get to see I.
What's that all about?
I've always had a me, like a good friend, been here through the ups and down. Good old me.
Ok, I made me up for company.
Hey, its lonely without me.
But wait, I made me up, how lonely can it be without an imaginary friend?
Duh.

Oh wait, but I still can't observe I.

And like, that's soooo important.

Because unless I can observe I then I can't....?
Hmmmm. What can't I do unless I observe I? Tell me that again?

Explore... :)

Many thanks!
John

[sencha71]

Because unless I can observe I then I can't....?
Hmmmm. What can't I do unless I observe I? Tell me that again?

Exactly.

OK, John, I'm now feeling like this goose is cooked. I began this inquiry half expecting some sort of "seeing no-self" peak experience rapture moment but the seeing has been more a gradual working out of remaining knots over time. Which is fine. Either way, no more objections to no-self seem to be arising.

The only things left on my list are curiosities that I think that are beyond the domain of LU. People who describe a total loss of fear after some "awakening". Joy & wonder suffusing every moment. No resistance to whatever happens or arises. Seeing everything as God. Looking within to find "unimaginable, perfect beauty in the still, silent heart".

(Sounds like, in other words, a permanent outstandingly good mood. I'd say I occupy a more peacefully neutral - albeit perturbable - space.)

Those mystical descriptions don't draw me like they used to. I bring them up solely in case their lack of full manifestation is some indicator that I still haven't gotten something.

You've been so helpful. With appreciation,
Brent

[s-p-a-c-e]

Because unless I can observe I then I can't....?
Hmmmm. What can't I do unless I observe I? Tell me that again?

Exactly.

OK, John, I'm now feeling like this goose is cooked. I began this inquiry half expecting some sort of "seeing no-self" peak experience rapture moment but the seeing has been more a gradual working out of remaining knots over time. Which is fine. Either way, no more objections to no-self seem to be arising.

Oh good, love a bit of goose.

Well, I have an objection. :)
What is no-self?

The only things left on my list are curiosities that I think that are beyond the domain of LU. People who describe a total loss of fear after some "awakening". Joy & wonder suffusing every moment. No resistance to whatever happens or arises. Seeing everything as God. Looking within to find "unimaginable, perfect beauty in the still, silent heart".

So, what is it that is separate to the rest of life?

With best wishes!
John

[sencha71]

Well, I have an objection. :)

This is good. My impression is that LU focuses exclusively on getting people over the no-self hurdle. I do believe I'm over that, and will explain my take as asked. But how is it I'm able to put something into words when I'm told "The Understanding cannot be communicated - only pointed to." Is the goose still frozen?!

What is no-self?

No-self is the theory that the selves or characters most of us human beings believe ourselves to be, riding along in this body, making choices, thinking thoughts, doing actions, don't actually exist. If a tree is seen it is assumed there is an "I" seeing a tree, when in fact seeing is just happening - just as plants are photosynthesizing without a photosynthesizer living inside the plant. Consciousness could be defined as sensitivity to environment (via hearing, seeing, feeling, etc.) but there is actually no requirement of, nor evidence for, an independent being (a self) that is the noun that is conscious. Thoughts and impulses to act appear in consciousness, and more thoughts or actions are the result. But there is no independent self, inside the body, doing or thinking any of this.

So, what is it that is separate to the rest of life?

There isn't anything separate. If I say I, an observer, see a tree what is really happening is that seeing is happening in consciousness. The same "thing" (life) that produces the tree also produces the consciousness that the tree is reflected in through the activity of seeing (but not a me doing the seeing).

[s-p-a-c-e]

Well, I have an objection. :)

This is good. My impression is that LU focuses exclusively on getting people over the no-self hurdle. I do believe I'm over that, and will explain my take as asked. But how is it I'm able to put something into words when I'm told "The Understanding cannot be communicated - only pointed to." Is the goose still frozen?!

Cos' we read between the lines. :)

What is no-self?

But there is no independent self, inside the body, doing or thinking any of this.

You might think I'm being a bit picky. :) You wouldn't be the first.
But I feel a responsibility to say that 'no self' is all very well, but rather than state 'there is no self', what we're looking at is the particular experience of being 'me', and closely observing that 'me' doesn't stand up to observation as a 'real self', such that it dawns on us that 'me' is a fabrication.

And following that we might state, "there is no independent self" - but really, we can only speak for ourselves (isn't language wonderful) :)

So, your experience of this, is unique. As will be the interpretation of it, should you wish to bring that to bear.

So, what is it that is separate to the rest of life?

There isn't anything separate. If I say I, an observer, see a tree what is really happening is that seeing is happening in consciousness. The same "thing" (life) that produces the tree also produces the consciousness that the tree is reflected in through the activity of seeing (but not a me doing the seeing).

How do you know that: The same "thing" (life) that produces the tree also produces the consciousness that the tree is reflected in through the activity of seeing (but not a me doing the seeing).

Just curious.

With best wishes,
John

[sencha71]

You might think I'm being a bit picky. :) You wouldn't be the first.

But I feel a responsibility to say that 'no self' is all very well, but rather than state 'there is no self', what we're looking at is the particular experience of being 'me', and closely observing that 'me' doesn't stand up to observation as a 'real self', such that it dawns on us that 'me' is a fabrication.

Picky is good. As you say, each person's experience is unique. Some people have reported seeing this as an experience similar to a death. Some as a beginning to identifying with everything. Mine is fairly simple - a sense of an incorrect belief having been removed. I think mine is simple because I'd mostly seen through the character but was still stuck with a subtler "observer" or "decider". Life does flow easier w/o the middleman though.

How do you know that: The same "thing" (life) that produces the tree also produces the consciousness that the tree is reflected in through the activity of seeing (but not a me doing the seeing).

I don't know this, actually. It's an intuitive leap. Whatever mechanism it is that grows and maintains a tree from seed is being assumed to do the same with human beings and all life. Whatever this process is, it's unobservable.

Thanks,
Brent

[s-p-a-c-e]

Hey Brent,

Have a few questions/pointers for you. Just respond as it shows up. :)

1) Was ‘me’/‘myself’ ever a living being that moves, speaks or thinks?

2) Explain in detail what the illusion of ‘me’/‘myself’ is, when it starts and how it works from your own experience. Describe it fully as you see it now.

3) How does it feel to see this? What is the difference from before you started this dialogue? Please report from the past few days.

4) What was key in seeing this?

5) Describe decision, intention, free will, choice and control. Does ‘me’/‘myself’ make things happen? Is ‘me’/‘myself’ in control of anything? How does it work? What is ‘me’/‘myself’ responsible for? Give examples from experience.

6) Anything to add?

With best wishes,
John

[sencha71]

1) Was ‘me’/‘myself’ ever a living being that moves, speaks or thinks?

No. It was thought held together by false assumptions that one is either unwilling (too uncomfortable) or unable (due to being hidden behind assumptions) to really look at to examine.

2) Explain in detail what the illusion of ‘me’/‘myself’ is, when it starts and how it works from your own experience. Describe it fully as you see it now.

It probably starts in childhood, due to wanting to be more liked, either by parents or friends. “Shortcomings" might be either noticed or pointed out to you, and self-talk begins re: how, through some sort of plan, “you” are going to become better to close the gap between where you believe you are now vs. the better version you intend to become some time in the future. This creates not only the illusion of a self but a flawed self that is put on a never-ending path to becoming “more”. As the current state does not feel “adequate” and therefore painful, some justification is needed as to why you’re currently not enough, and thus victim stories and rationalizations begin about unfair turns of events in your life that explain why you are currently not where you want to be. They become an integral and valued part of who you think you are.

3) How does it feel to see this? What is the difference from before you started this dialogue? Please report from the past few days.

In my personal experience I had already seen through this mostly before coming to LU. But I was still left with some sense of separation. A subtle observer or do-er felt as an entity in the body (though not the character described in (2)) which made it feel like there was still something separate from life. There was still a sense of something not being resolved which was driving a relentless seeking. That burden and drive has disappeared which feels great! Choice- and decision-making feels smoother and quicker as well. I am still enjoying re-reading some nonduality material from favorite authors but it's more the enjoyment of the writing and pondering some realizations I haven't necessarily had (e.g. everything is consciousness - literally?!) however there's no hook in it making the heart beat uncomfortably faster and accompanied by a strong feeling of frustration about missing some key to unlock some secret knowledge. Maybe some of these realizations will come to me some day too but... doesn't really matter.

4) What was key in seeing this?

I believe seeing through the illusion of free will was key. I had tried to do this on my own but never made much progress. I was surprised how quickly it happened after years of being stuck at a plateau.

5) Describe decision, intention, free will, choice and control. Does ‘me’/‘myself’ make things happen? Is ‘me’/‘myself’ in control of anything? How does it work? What is ‘me’/‘myself’ responsible for? Give examples from experience.

There is no me making things happen but decisions still get made. The only way to see this is to investigate - while you’re still believing in a “me” - how decisions are made and actions are initiated. Often they may be the result of thinking, but the thoughts just appear in consciousness and aren’t manufactured by a me. If I say, "That's not true! Right now I'm going to think of a.... purple deer!" ...well, what picked "purple deer"?! Choices or actions may also be driven by feelings or preferences but again these drivers were never created by a me, nor is a me in control of what they are. The fact that one can feel a weighing happen and attribute it to thought or feeling may make it feel like there is a me doing this, but a me is superfluous. Example: I’m going to take a vacation because my job is driving me crazy and I’m stressed out. Obviously the feelings aren’t under the me’s control or it would never choose to feel stressed out, but what about the idea of taking a vacation and the choice of where? The idea may come from another person, advertisement, or thought - all of which aren't under the control of a me - they just appear. Where one decides to go depends upon preferences for certain cultures and environments which, while unique to each individual, also are just there and were never consciously chosen.

6) Anything to add?

You have been a fantastic guide. I almost didn’t join LU out of an assumption that having pondered non duality for so many years, I’d probably be further along than any guide and not find him/her to be very helpful. That couldn’t have been further from the truth. And I'm willing to keep going as long as you feel there are things to resolve.

With gratitude,
Brent

[s-p-a-c-e]

Hey Brent,

Just sent you a PM (private message).
- link on top-right, by the account name/icon.

With best wishes,
John