Beanstalk and Forgetmenot

[thursday123]

Kay,

What is actual experience? Sound AND thought AND smell AND taste AND sensation AND colour. Is there an ‘AND’? Is experience actually divided? Or is there simply soundthoughtsmelltastesensationcolour?

No dividing line can be found between them. only thoughts about a dividing line. there is simply soundthoughtsmelltastesensationcolour

And what is experience as it is exactly?

can't be expressed in words, but if we have to soundthoughtsmelltastesensationcolour is probably closest

Nice looking. So now look around you and see how what you observed with the body is the same with everything that appears. Look at the computer screen, chair, floor, window, other person etc….and ask the same questions with each object. “Has this ……….. (insert object name, and include sound, taste, smell etc) + story every appeared before? Let me know how you go.

the suggestion any of the objects and stories have appeared before is just a thought. for example, a sound - thought says 'that's roadworks happening outside. I've heard roadworks loads of times before because I live in a town.' but really there is just sound. the story about 'roadworks' cannot be verified and neither can the belief that it's been experienced before, because there are only thoughts about the familiarity with it, nothing else

The image of Einstein is just a story. There is no Einstein of any kind present. Just a story.

Now notice that thought is doing this with everything. In fact, without thought, there wouldn't even seem to be any things.

I have looked and can only find colour and stories about things, no actual things


Beanstalk

[forgetmenot]

Hey Beanstalk,

And what is experience as it is exactly?

can't be expressed in words, but if we have to soundthoughtsmelltastesensationcolour is probably closest

Lovely!

Past and memory go hand-in-hand as almost everybody believes that a memory thought is referring to something that has happened; that a memory thought is a different thought than a non-memory thought.

Please don’t go to thought explanation, but just let a memory be there, and look at it.

What is memory exactly?
What is the memory ‘made of’?

What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘memory’ thought?

WHEN does the memory actually appear?
How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened?

Then, look at a thought about the future.
What is the future thought ‘made of’?

WHEN does the future thought appear?
What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘future’ thought?
How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘future’ thought refers to something that will happen?

Then let’s compare a thought about the past and a thought about the future.
What is the EXACT difference between the thoughts about past and future?
If there is a difference, how is that difference known exactly?

Look at what is actually going on and not what thoughts say… but what actually is.

Kay

[thursday123]

Kay,

What is memory exactly?

A thought and the belief that the thought content 'actually happened', which is also just a thought

What is the memory ‘made of’?

Thought

What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘memory’ thought?

There isn't really a difference, only with the 'memory' thought there is another thought suggesting that what the thought contains actually occurred

WHEN does the memory actually appear?

In the 'now'

How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened?

It cannot be known. It can only be suggested by thought

Then, look at a thought about the future.
What is the future thought ‘made of’?

Thought and the belief that what the thought talks about may happen in the future, which is more thought

What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘future’ thought?

There's no real difference between them because they are both just thoughts

WHEN does the future thought appear?

In the 'now'

How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘future’ thought refers to something that will happen?

It cannot be known

Then let’s compare a thought about the past and a thought about the future.
What is the EXACT difference between the thoughts about past and future?

With thoughts about past, there is a sense (a concurrent thought) saying 'this actually happened'. With thoughts about the future, there is a concurrent thought suggesting 'this may happen in the future'. But none of this can be verified at all - it is all just thought and cannot extend beyond that


Beanstalk

[forgetmenot]

Hey Beanstalk,

Then, look at a thought about the future.
What is the future thought ‘made of’?

Thought and the belief that what the thought talks about may happen in the future, which is more thought

Is there a difference between a thought and a belief?

So let’s see where we are at. Please answer the following with what's true for you right now, rather than any sort of 'ideal' answer.

Is there a separate individual/entity that is the ‘experiencer’?

Is there a separate entity that is the doer?

Is there ‘someone/something’ who can control what happens?

Is there a ‘self’ that can ‘make decisions’ or that can 'choose' anything?

Is there a separate 'self’ who ‘does the thinking’?

Or a ‘separate self’ that is the body or is inside the body?

Are thought, sensation, colour, sound, taste and smell ‘experienced’ by a ‘separate self’?

Is there a ‘self’ ‘in here’ which is separate from the world and others ‘out there’?

Is the ‘separate self’ anything other than a imaginary story?

Is there any confusion at all or anything you would like to address?

Looking forward to your answers!

Kay

[thursday123]

Kay,

Sorry for not replying yet, I've been really busy the past couple of days. I will try my best to respond tomorrow (it's very late now where I am) but if not will certainly do so the day after. Hope that's okay

Beanstalk

[thursday123]

Kay,

Is there a difference between a thought and a belief?

it seems as though not all thought is belief, but all belief is thought. there are some thoughts I don't believe in, but the belief in a thought can only ever be more thought itself

Is there a separate individual/entity that is the ‘experiencer’?

A separate 'experiencer' cannot be found, that is obvious when 'I' look. But from moment to moment I still feel as much like 'me' as I ever have. Thoughts are still constantly coming up with excuses, like 'I can never be sure that there isn't a separate self so that will always mean there could be' or 'if there is no separate self what explains the effort that appears to go into thinking/doing things?' The same doubts/questions have always popped up every time I've looked and whilst I feel I've made lots of progress, these thoughts/doubts never seem to lose their vigour

Is there a separate entity that is the doer?

a separate doer cannot be found, though again this is not my experience throughout my waking day, but only when I look. There is only thought that appears to point to a doer

Is there ‘someone/something’ who can control what happens?

a controller cannot be found, but for some reason it still feels like there is. that sense of a controller is seen as just more thought when I look, but nevertheless it persists. Perhaps I'm expecting to 'see through' these 'false' thoughts at some point when really there is nothing to see through, just more thought being thought

Is there a separate 'self’ who ‘does the thinking’?

a thinker cannot be found. there are plenty of doubting thoughts as I've discussed above, for example 'thought is so complex, maybe there is a thinker I just can't comprehend', but also there's not even a reason behind the doubts a lot of the time, just a sense of 'no, it just can't be' which won't seem to give up. I know these doubts are also just more thoughts, but that doesn't seem to change anything

Or a ‘separate self’ that is the body or is inside the body?

no

Are thought, sensation, colour, sound, taste and smell ‘experienced’ by a ‘separate self’?

no. attention can make it appear that there is a 'me' tied up in different aspects of experience, moving around within it, but there is not. when I look in this way (using this sort of question) is when i feel like i see most clearly

Is there a ‘self’ ‘in here’ which is separate from the world and others ‘out there’?

when I look, it is clear there's not

Is the ‘separate self’ anything other than a imaginary story?

despite all the looking and it being obvious there's no separate self every time I do, it does not feel like an imaginary story. I still feel as much like me as I did when the investigation began

Is there any confusion at all or anything you would like to address?

Not at the moment, no


Beanstalk

[forgetmenot]

Hello Beanstalk,

Is there a difference between a thought and a belief?

it seems as though not all thought is belief, but all belief is thought. there are some thoughts I don't believe in, but the belief in a thought can only ever be more thought itself

A belief is a thought, just a plain old thought, but it is a thought that is supported by only other thoughts. A belief is a thought about reality, for which there is no actual experiential evidence.

What is the difference between 'believing a thought' and 'not believing a thought'?
There is no difference between them; they are both AE of thought. It's the content of the thought that differs. The 'believing thought - says something is believed'. The 'not believing thought says it is 'not believed'. So both are the same.it is just the story that is different. But a story is just a story.

Is there a separate individual/entity that is the ‘experiencer’?

A separate 'experiencer' cannot be found, that is obvious when 'I' look. But from moment to moment I still feel as much like 'me' as I ever have.

And to what exactly does that matter? There is an expectation here that the story of a ‘me being an experiencer’ ie an “I” should vanish. There has NEVER been a separate self…EVER. Seeing through the illusion of “I” doesn’t mean you will lose the “I” and with it your whole identity. The “I” doesn’t exist, not even now as you are reading these lines.

If there really is no inherent self, how would the experience be different from what already is?

This exploration is just a beginning and not an ending. There will still be beliefs and patterns that are rooted in the idea of being a separate self that will need clearing as not everything gets rewritten in one big hit. The core belief of being a separate self is seen through, however, like a rug that is beginning to unravel, there are still many knots that still need undoing. Knowing that the ‘conditioning’ is not something that you own makes it is easier to clear. Continuing to LOOK after the realisation is very much the key.

Thoughts are still constantly coming up with excuses, like 'I can never be sure that there isn't a separate self so that will always mean there could be' or 'if there is no separate self what explains the effort that appears to go into thinking/doing things?' The same doubts/questions have always popped up every time I've looked and whilst I feel I've made lots of progress, these thoughts/doubts never seem to lose their vigour

You are wanting thought to confirm that you have seen! Thoughts have no idea what you actually are, nor do they know anything about excuses, and they are not coming up with excuses…that in itself is a thought story about thought!

Is “I” a place where thoughts appear, or is “I” a thought that arises and subsides by itself?

Have you looked to see who is asking the question regarding needing explanations about who or what makes the effort into thinking/doing things?

How? Implies cause.
Why? Implies meaning.
Where? Implies space
When? Implies time.
What? Implies thingness.

If the self isn't a real, solid, permanent, separate thing, what could be annihilated?
Is it okay to live with the illusion?
Isn't the illusion also a part of life itself?
Do you expect the self illusion to disappear?
Is there a you to have or not to have a self?

Is there ‘someone/something’ who can control what happens?

a controller cannot be found, but for some reason it still feels like there is. that sense of a controller is seen as just more thought when I look, but nevertheless it persists. Perhaps I'm expecting to 'see through' these 'false' thoughts at some point when really there is nothing to see through, just more thought being thought

Again, you want the identification with an “I/self” to stop as proof that you have 100% clearly seen that there is no self. But that idea/thought is just another thought bubble and is seen in utter clarity. Even the idea that something is identifying with thought about being able to choose, decide, control is just an idea. There is NOTHING here that can identify with thought. Only thought says that something is identifying as/with anything and that there is something that is/can control, choose, decide or do.

Is there a separate 'self’ who ‘does the thinking’?

a thinker cannot be found. there are plenty of doubting thoughts as I've discussed above, for example 'thought is so complex, maybe there is a thinker I just can't comprehend', but also there's not even a reason behind the doubts a lot of the time, just a sense of 'no, it just can't be' which won't seem to give up. I know these doubts are also just more thoughts, but that doesn't seem to change anything

Are you the author of doubting thoughts or of belief thoughts?
Where you find a doubt, you will find a belief, because actual experience cannot be doubted. Investigate the doubt.

Can doubt exist as an experience in the present moment? Doesn't it require some projection into past/future? I'd look at thought too -- take away the doubting thoughts and what remains?


Thought A appears “There’s no-one here to do anything. Experience happens”
Thought B then appears saying “I can clearly see it, but it’s still ongoing process for me”.

Now when you look at this, does thought A have any knowledge of thought B? Does thought B have any knowledge of thought A? It may seem that way, but when we look closely, what is found?

Is the ‘separate self’ anything other than a imaginary story?

despite all the looking and it being obvious there's no separate self every time I do, it does not feel like an imaginary story. I still feel as much like me as I did when the investigation began

Really? Are you saying that your perception has not changed at all?

When you started your exploration with Nina…she got you to answer the 4 following questions. I would like you to answer them again for me please.

1) How might life change when you directly experience the truth/no-self ?
2) How would you change then?
3) What will be different?
4) What is missing?

Let’s look at the belief “I still believe that I am a “me”.

1. The thought “I still believe that I am a “me” arises. So the thought is actual experience of thought. And other thoughts that arise with that thought, about that thought, are the content of that thought.

2. The thought “I still believe that I am a “me” has a feeling associated with it...a feeling labelled “me”, “sense of self” etc . If there is no actual sensation, then the feeling is just another thought/idea ABOUT a “me” and the content of that label is not real.

- If there is an actual sensation, then the sensation is actual experience of sensation not the actual experience of a “me”. Sensation is actual experience BUT is not associated with the thought (that is a lie). Labels are actual experience but the content of labels are not real.

- So the thought “I still believe that I am a “me” ” is actual experience but the content of the thought is not ‘real’

- The sensation labelled as “me/sense of self” is actual experience but the content is not real.

- Any actual sensation is actual experience but not as the content of what thought labels the sensation as or what thought says about the sensation. Sensations are simply AE of sensation.

3. All previous experience of “I still believe that I am a “me” are arising in the moment but as images and thoughts, and those images and thoughts are actual experience but the content is not real.

4. The thought “a belief is experienced through emotions, sensations, memories etc” is content of a thought that is defining what “this is a belief” means.


Kay

[thursday123]

Kay,

If there really is no inherent self, how would the experience be different from what already is?

it wouldn't, but this is the reason I originally thought I was there after my guidance with nina, and then it appeared that I wasn't, so it must be different somehow otherwise how would it be possible to distinguish between those who have seen there's no separate self and those who haven't? but experience itself cannot be different. the only way it seems to me that the realisation could occur is through thought telling me that there's no separate self - what other tool is there with which to 'realise' anything? (even though I know nothing can truly be realise through thought)

Is “I” a place where thoughts appear, or is “I” a thought that arises and subsides by itself?

there are only thoughts about an 'I' that arise and subside by themselves

Have you looked to see who is asking the question regarding needing explanations about who or what makes the effort into thinking/doing things?

there is no-one asking these questions. they are just more thoughts

If the self isn't a real, solid, permanent, separate thing, what could be annihilated?

nothing could be

Is it okay to live with the illusion?

yes

Isn't the illusion also a part of life itself?

yes

Do you expect the self illusion to disappear?

yes but I shouldn't

Is there a you to have or not to have a self?

no

Are you the author of doubting thoughts or of belief thoughts?

no

Where you find a doubt, you will find a belief, because actual experience cannot be doubted. Investigate the doubt.

okay so for example 'the appearance of a separate self all fits together too well for it to be an illusion'. I investigated it and realised that 1/there is no-one thinking it and 2/there is no evidence in AE to back it up. Couldn't find a belief as such but wouldn't that mean thinking about it rather than looking in AE?

Can doubt exist as an experience in the present moment? Doesn't it require some projection into past/future? I'd look at thought too -- take away the doubting thoughts and what remains?

it exists as AE of thought but the thought content requires projection into past/future. if the doubting thoughts are taken away everything remains/nothing really changes, just experience the same as it's always been

Now when you look at this, does thought A have any knowledge of thought B? Does thought B have any knowledge of thought A? It may seem that way, but when we look closely, what is found?

neither thought has knowledge of the other, there are just thoughts occurring

Really? Are you saying that your perception has not changed at all?

this was an exaggeration - I would say I'm certainly seeing less of what's not there

1) How might life change when you directly experience the truth/no-self ?

I have no idea

2) How would you change then?

No idea again

3) What will be different?

I'm don't want it to seem like I'm just breezing over these answers but I honestly haven't a clue

4) What is missing?

something in the illusory/not-actually-there sense, nothing real is missing though


Beanstalk

[forgetmenot]

Hello Beanstalk,

If there really is no inherent self, how would the experience be different from what already is?

it wouldn't, but this is the reason I originally thought I was there after my guidance with nina, and then it appeared that I wasn't,

And what was it that said that you hadn’t seen through the illusory self? What is it that you seem to see in others that you weren’t experiencing?

so it must be different somehow otherwise how would it be possible to distinguish between those who have seen there's no separate self and those who haven't? but experience itself cannot be different. the only way it seems to me that the realisation could occur is through thought telling me that there's no separate self - what other tool is there with which to 'realise' anything? (even though I know nothing can truly be realise through thought)

The realisation is not about there being no such entity as ‘no self’ - there has never been one…so how can an absence of a ‘no self’ be experienced? It is simply the noting of an absence of a self. So it is not about "Oh look, there is the experience of no self"; it is realising that any sense of self is seen to be not real, that on scrutiny there is no substance of self that underlies the object or thought.

Have you looked to see who is asking the question regarding needing explanations about who or what makes the effort into thinking/doing things?

there is no-one asking these questions. they are just more thoughts

Yes, exactly. But you write that as if it means nothing. as if you are regurgitating some known answer, robotically. Look at it. There is no one asking these questions. Thoughts simply appear. They are not appearing to anyone. There is no one thinking thoughts and there is no one receiving thoughts.

Do you expect the self illusion to disappear?

yes but I shouldn't

How can something that doesn't exist disappear? I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for thoughts that appear ABOUT a 'me' to stop appearing...because there is no one/no thing that is controlling what thoughts appear or when.

Where you find a doubt, you will find a belief, because actual experience cannot be doubted. Investigate the doubt.

okay so for example 'the appearance of a separate self all fits together too well for it to be an illusion'. I investigated it and realised that 1/there is no-one thinking it and 2/there is no evidence in AE to back it up. Couldn't find a belief as such but wouldn't that mean thinking about it rather than looking in AE?

Tell me....how did you investigate that thought? I want you to tell me exactly how you investigated it...a step by step description on how you looked to see if that thought was pointing to AE or to more thoughts.

You are not seeing your beliefs, instead your beliefs are telling you what to see. This is the simple difference between confusion and clarity.

You can’t find a separate self and yet you keep saying there is one. That is a belief telling you what to see and feel.

Can you find a Beanstalkself anywhere?
Where in colour, sound, smell, taste, thought and sensation do you find a self of any description?

Can doubt exist as an experience in the present moment? Doesn't it require some projection into past/future? I'd look at thought too -- take away the doubting thoughts and what remains?

it exists as AE of thought but the thought content requires projection into past/future. if the doubting thoughts are taken away everything remains/nothing really changes, just experience the same as it's always been

Yes, exactly. So what are you expecting to change? What should change so that it is clear there is no separate self? What experience are you waiting for?

Now when you look at this, does thought A have any knowledge of thought B? Does thought B have any knowledge of thought A? It may seem that way, but when we look closely, what is found?

neither thought has knowledge of the other, there are just thoughts occurring

Is it? Obviously not for you when you are telling me that thoughts keep telling you that you are a separate self. So you are saying that thought A knows what thought B is referring to!

Really? Are you saying that your perception has not changed at all?

this was an exaggeration - I would say I'm certainly seeing less of what's not there

How can you see less of something that isn't there? How can you see the elephant in the room when the elephant doesn't exist? This doesn't make any sense. It's not about seeing less of what's not here (how you would do that is beyond me)...it's about looking at what actually is here instead! What is here underneath all the thoughts that is not conceptual? What is here right now, and is always here? It's about moving attention from mental images and thoughts to actuality, to this very moment in every moment and noticing what you notice ie noticing what IS.

3) What will be different?

I'm don't want it to seem like I'm just breezing over these answers but I honestly haven't a clue

Yes, you are breezing over all these answers and not really looking at them to see your own expectations. Why did you come to LU in the first place? There was a reason you registered for the forum to be guided. You wanted something...what was it? A bit of self honesty is needed here.

You say you don't have a clue and yet you are saying that you know you haven't seen through the separate self because everything still remains the same. How do you know you haven't seen then, if you don't have a clue? You have expectations on what seeing through the separate self should look like. If you didn’t, then you wouldn’t be wanting something to be different than what it is.

4) What is missing?

something in the illusory/not-actually-there sense, nothing real is missing though

What?? How can something that is illusory be missing? That doesn’t even make sense. It’s like saying a desert is trying to find the oasis that was a mirage. How can a desert miss something that never existed in the first place?

Kay

[thursday123]

Kay,

And what was it that said that you hadn’t seen through the illusory self? What is it that you seem to see in others that you weren’t experiencing?

I resolved that I must have seem through it after I answered the final questions and was added to the facebook group, but then after responding to a post regarding settling in it seemed I hadn't, so I was added back onto the forum.
I remember Ilona asking 'is there still seeking energy present?' and remember thinking that was exactly what it felt like. I had struggled to verbalise the sense of being not done until that but that is exactly what it felt and still feels like - seeking energy

In the gateless gatecrashers book and some of the testimonials it seems like people have a point where they 'get it', so I was waiting for that, because that's not something that seems to have occurred

Probably the biggest factor in creating my expectations was the jed mckenna books which got me into all of this. Shortly after reading his 'theory of everything' I had 3 months of chaos where lots of strange things started happening to me - I started seeing repeating numbers everywhere, hearing what felt like messages in songs, and became weighed down by a complete sense of meaninglessness so strong at times I could hardly get out of bed. The depression part is something he explains in great detail in the books as part of the process of awakening, so I thought that must be what it was. So coming onto this forum I expected something similar, but nothing like that has happened. He also describes it as something that can never be undone, but that's not what it feels like for me at all. I think I could forget about all of this and go on living my life as though I'd never encountered any of it if I wanted, though that isn't what I want. And furthermore he describes the state of 'human adulthood' as something that is attained through this process, though I don't seem to have changed at all

okay so for example 'the appearance of a separate self all fits together too well for it to be an illusion'. I investigated it and realised that 1/there is no-one thinking it and 2/there is no evidence in AE to back it up. Couldn't find a belief as such but wouldn't that mean thinking about it rather than looking in AE?

Tell me....how did you investigate that thought? I want you to tell me exactly how you investigated it...a step by step description on how you looked to see if that thought was pointing to AE or to more thoughts.

I placed the thought in AE, which meant holding the thought in the mind whilst also holding attention on all other apsects of AE, and waiting to see what came up, though I only spent a few mimutes on it and should have spent longer

Yes, exactly. So what are you expecting to change? What should change so that it is clear there is no separate self? What experience are you waiting for?

I have wrongly been expecting awakening to be a sort of stateof knowingness, where something is realised and I enter a state of non-dual awareness. I have been waiting for an a-ha moment. These are ideas I've been holding onto for a while. It is becoming clear that neither of these things are likely to happen, because there is not a no-self to see and any 'state' is just another projection of the mind. All that has to be seen is what already is and nothing more

Yes, you are breezing over all these answers and not really looking at them to see your own expectations. Why did you come to LU in the first place? There was a reason you registered for the forum to be guided. You wanted something...what was it? A bit of self honesty is needed here.

As referred to above, I wanted what jed mckenna describes as human adulthood. Awakening sounded like something exciting and I think that was the reason why I came here. Also, I'd never had any spiritual aspirations really, and only read the 'theory of everything' book because I happened to hear about it somewhere and it sounded interesting. As such the period of chaos that ensued (and I surmised to have been caused by reading the book) was sort of involuntarily brought on me, and so I thought it must be what I was meant to be doing and, having already started the process, I may as well finish it


Beanstalk

[forgetmenot]

Hello Beanstalk,

I remember Ilona asking 'is there still seeking energy present?' and remember thinking that was exactly what it felt like. I had struggled to verbalise the sense of being not done until that but that is exactly what it felt and still feels like - seeking energy

The seeking energy you talk about…are you literally still seeking to find something, to find answers? Is the seeking an intense seeking, that was suffering in itself, to find the truth? That is what is meant by ‘are you still seeking’.

In the gateless gatecrashers book and some of the testimonials it seems like people have a point where they 'get it', so I was waiting for that, because that's not something that seems to have occurred

So what aren’t you getting exactly?

Probably the biggest factor in creating my expectations was the jed mckenna books which got me into all of this. Shortly after reading his 'theory of everything' I had 3 months of chaos where lots of strange things started happening to me - I started seeing repeating numbers everywhere, hearing what felt like messages in songs, and became weighed down by a complete sense of meaninglessness so strong at times I could hardly get out of bed. The depression part is something he explains in great detail in the books as part of the process of awakening, so I thought that must be what it was. So coming onto this forum I expected something similar, but nothing like that has happened.

Your expectations are rushing in saying, “Yeah, but…”, “OK, but what about…?”, “I was taught that…”, “My other teacher or the book I read said…” All this must be pushed aside and sometimes quite aggressively. You have expectations of having experiences. Experiences come and go and do not really point to anything. So the seeming characters have experiences in the dream…so what? Does this moment care about what experiences happen or don’t happen?

He also describes it as something that can never be undone, but that's not what it feels like for me at all. I think I could forget about all of this and go on living my life as though I'd never encountered any of it if I wanted, though that isn't what I want.

Tell you what, give it a go for a month and see if you can. Then let me know how you went trying to do it.

And furthermore he describes the state of 'human adulthood' as something that is attained through this process, though I don't seem to have changed at all.

Yes, ‘human adulthood’ is part of the process….but that doesn’t happen overnight. It takes time, and for some it can take years. There is no set period…it is different for everyone. It also depends on how willing you are to look at the baggage you still carry, beliefs and emotional reactions you have acquired from your past. As I have said…seeing through the self is just a beginning and not an ending. You are expecting years of conditioning to fall away overnight and to become a ‘human adult’ in one fowl swoop. It doesn’t happen like that.

Tell me....how did you investigate that thought? I want you to tell me exactly how you investigated it...a step by step description on how you looked to see if that thought was pointing to AE or to more thoughts.

I placed the thought in AE, which meant holding the thought in the mind whilst also holding attention on all other apsects of AE, and waiting to see what came up, though I only spent a few mimutes on it and should have spent longer

How do you place a thought in AE exactly? I don’t even know what that means. Thought is AE! How do you place a thought in colour, smell, taste, sensation, sound and thought? I find it very hard to hold a thought in the first place, let alone while trying to hold attention to all other aspects of AE! I don’t know what that is supposed to do…but that isn’t looking!

Can you find an actual “I” in the thought 'the appearance of a separate self all fits together too well for it to be an illusion”?

What is the thought “'the appearance of a separate self all fits together too well for it to be an illusion” actually pointing to? Is it pointing to actual experience ie sound, colour, smell, taste, sensation? Or is it pointing to AE of thought only? It’s as simple as that.

Looking is a nice simple thing - there is no need to over-complicate it.

Just look now...a thought can be found, but can a thinker of thought be found?
Can an “I” be found in thought itself?

Sound can be found, but can a hearer of sounds be found?
Can an “I” be found in sound itself?

Colour can be found, but can a see-er of colour be found?
Can an “I” be found in colour itself?

Sensation can be found, but can a feeler of sensation be found?
Can an “I” be found in sensation itself?

Smell can be found, but can a smeller of smell be found?
Can an “I” be found in smell itself?

Taste can be found, but can a taster of taste be found?
Can an “I” be found in taste itself?

Experience can be found, but can an experiencer of experience be found?
It's as simple as that. Just look and see what is actually present ie sound, colour, smell, taste, thought and sensation - and what is only imaginary.

Yes, exactly. So what are you expecting to change? What should change so that it is clear there is no separate self? What experience are you waiting for?

I have wrongly been expecting awakening to be a sort of stateof knowingness, where something is realised and I enter a state of non-dual awareness.

And what would that look like? That doesn’t even compute! What does entering a state of non-dual awareness mean? The dream is the dream of duality…so how would that change? Seeing through the illusory self is not about attaining a different state! It’s to see that what you thought you were, doesn’t exist.

And more to the point…where is this “I” that is becoming anything or something?

You would have read this in several places…even when registering to come to forum and perhaps your guide will have given you the link to read. Please read it again.

http://www.liberationunleashed.com/about/faq/#faq-1041

I have been waiting for an a-ha moment. These are ideas I've been holding onto for a while. It is becoming clear that neither of these things are likely to happen, because there is not a no-self to see and any 'state' is just another projection of the mind. All that has to be seen is what already is and nothing more

Yes…all that has to be seen is what already IS and always has been. It can be very disappointing when there have been high hopes of something different. However, it isn’t as mundane as it seems. The world does become a beautiful place and a marvel…once other beliefs start to fall away…but it is up to you to do the work in discovering what beliefs are still running and to see them differently.

Yes, you are breezing over all these answers and not really looking at them to see your own expectations. Why did you come to LU in the first place? There was a reason you registered for the forum to be guided. You wanted something...what was it? A bit of self honesty is needed here.

As referred to above, I wanted what jed mckenna describes as human adulthood. Awakening sounded like something exciting and I think that was the reason why I came here. Also, I'd never had any spiritual aspirations really, and only read the 'theory of everything' book because I happened to hear about it somewhere and it sounded interesting. As such the period of chaos that ensued (and I surmised to have been caused by reading the book) was sort of involuntarily brought on me, and so I thought it must be what I was meant to be doing and, having already started the process, I may as well finish it

So there was no burning desire to do or see anything..only boredom with life! There was no seeking in the first place…so how can there still be a seeking energy? Wanting excitement is not what this is about. Perhaps it would be good for you to look and see if you can find what it is exactly that is bored and wants excitement. This is about realising you are not some independent entity that is trying to survive and navigate life to the best of your ability while trying to avoid suffering…to only then die. Realising no self does bring change. Thoughts start to change, peace becomes the prevalent feeling and feeling content no matter what life brings is what happens. But it certainly doesn't happen overnight.

Kay

[thursday123]

Kay,

The seeking energy you talk about…are you literally still seeking to find something, to find answers?

No, sorry, I misunderstood. I am not really looking for answers anymore, because there are no answers to be found. What I meant is that there is an urge to keep on looking, in the hope of some ultimate revelation

Is the seeking an intense seeking, that was suffering in itself, to find the truth? That is what is meant by ‘are you still seeking’.

When I look properly (not as I have in response to the last couple of posts, sorry about that) I look very hard, until I get a headache and then some more, but this is not so much to find answers but, as I said, due to hopes of some breakthrough which I have realised now is not likely to occur

So what aren’t you getting exactly?

It's not so much not getting it, but more a sense that I am not seeing it clearly enough. But I know also this is just a thought and there's nothing to actually see. I have a doubting mind by nature and it gets in the way of things. In reality, there is not much if anything

Experience can be found, but can an experiencer of experience be found?

as far as I'm aware that I'm not getting

Tell you what, give it a go for a month and see if you can. Then let me know how you went trying to do it.

I would much rather continue if that's okay

How do you place a thought in AE exactly? I don’t even know what that means.

I thought that was what my last guide told me to do, maybe I misunderstood

Can you find an actual “I” in the thought 'the appearance of a separate self all fits together too well for it to be an illusion”?

No, it is just a thought, no 'I' involved

Experience can be found, but can an experiencer of experience be found?

No, there is nothing there besides experience

And more to the point…where is this “I” that is becoming anything or something?

Nowhere, there are only thoughts about an I becoming something


I can see I've allowed my expectations to get in the way here, and have also been lazy in the last couple of posts. Sorry for wasting your time with them. In relation to the existence of the I, I now don't think much more work is needed, as it's obvious to me when I look that there is no 'I', so maybe I could start looking at other beliefs on my own, but if you think more looking is needed here on the forum then I would rather do that instead.


Beanstalk

[forgetmenot]

Hello Beanstalk,

Experience can be found, but can an experiencer of experience be found?

as far as I'm aware that I'm not getting

Okay…we did one exercise on seeing whether there is an experience of experience. It was about seeing blackness when the eyes were closed. So, let’s try another exercise. Please close your eyes for this exercise and just notice any ‘mental’ images or thoughts that appear about a table or hand and put them aside ie IGNORE them.

Place a hand on a table.
Now 'go to' the sensation which we would normally refer to as 'hand on table' and answer from what you can FIND.

1) How many things do you find? Are there two things - hand and table? Or is there simply AE of sensation?
2) Do you notice 'one thing feeling another thing'? Or is there just 'sensation'?
3) Do you find an 'I', a body, a hand 'feeling' . . . or is there just 'sensation'?
What do you find?

Look very carefully. Where does ‘feeling’ end and sensation begin? Can a dividing line between ‘feeling’ and sensation be found? Or is there just sensation?

Can a ‘feeler’ be found in 'what is being felt' – AE sensation?

If that is all, and no INHERENT FEELER is found . . . would anything that is suggested as the feeler be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

How do you place a thought in AE exactly? I don’t even know what that means.

I thought that was what my last guide told me to do, maybe I misunderstood

Thought is AE. Thought either points to AE or it points to thoughts about thought. If a though arises about a ‘blue sky’….the word ‘blue’ points to AE of colour…right? The word ‘sky’ points to AE of thought only. Can a ‘sky’ be found as AE?

Can you find an actual “I” in the thought 'the appearance of a separate self all fits together too well for it to be an illusion”?

No, it is just a thought, no 'I' involved

Exactly. Can you find an "I" anywhere in/as colour, smell, taste, sensation or sound either?

And more to the point…where is this “I” that is becoming anything or something?

Nowhere, there are only thoughts about an I becoming something

And did you actually look for see if this was so….or you just relying on ‘memory’. You need to look each time…and not just say ‘no’. It is the consistent and diligent looking that brings about the realisation. So looking needs to happen day in and day out.

I can see I've allowed my expectations to get in the way here, and have also been lazy in the last couple of posts. Sorry for wasting your time with them. In relation to the existence of the I, I now don't think much more work is needed, as it's obvious to me when I look that there is no 'I', so maybe I could start looking at other beliefs on my own, but if you think more looking is needed here on the forum then I would rather do that instead.

Let’s continue a little longer and see how we go.

What I would like you to do is to read this thread from beginning to end…redoing exercises that you feel a pull to do and then report back on what you notice/insights.

Kay

[thursday123]

Kay,

1) How many things do you find? Are there two things - hand and table? Or is there simply AE of sensation?

There is only sensation. Thought is always portraying the images of 'hand' and 'table' as though to suggest they are there, but there is only AE of sensation and AE of thought, no 'hand' or 'table'

2) Do you notice 'one thing feeling another thing'? Or is there just 'sensation'?

There is nothing feeling anything else, but only AE of sensation

3) Do you find an 'I', a body, a hand 'feeling' . . . or is there just 'sensation'?
What do you find?

there are only thoughts about an 'I', body or hand feeling. But really there is only AE of sensation and AE of thought

Look very carefully. Where does ‘feeling’ end and sensation begin? Can a dividing line between ‘feeling’ and sensation be found? Or is there just sensation?

there is no dividing line between feeling and sensation, there is only sensation and thought-stories about an I/body/hand that is feeling - there is no feeling or feeler to be found in AE

Can a ‘feeler’ be found in 'what is being felt' – AE sensation?

no, there is just sensation happening completely on its own. a feeler is not present, and is not necessary for sensation to happen

If that is all, and no INHERENT FEELER is found . . . would anything that is suggested as the feeler be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

no, it could never be more than that. thought is constantly trying to impose some meaning on it, but that is only ever AE of thought and nothing more, just as the sensation is AE of sensation and nothing more

Thought is AE. Thought either points to AE or it points to thoughts about thought. If a though arises about a ‘blue sky’….the word ‘blue’ points to AE of colour…right? The word ‘sky’ points to AE of thought only. Can a ‘sky’ be found as AE?

yes, the word 'blue' points to AE of colour, but the word 'sky' is just a thought, and exists as thought only. There is no such thing as 'sky' in AE, only AE of thought. But in truth, the word 'blue', even though it points to AE of colour, is in itself also just AE of thought, right?

Exactly. Can you find an "I" anywhere in/as colour, smell, taste, sensation or sound either?

No. When looking at colour, for example, there is a strong thought-image of 'me' looking at the colour, 'me' blinking, 'my' gaze shifting, basically an image of whatever is 'supposed' to be there, and a belief that there is a 'me' doing the seeing, but it is only there as AE of thought. With smell it's the same, a thought-image of 'me' smelling, along with a strong belief that there is a 'me' choosing and enacting the inhaling, but these are just thoughts and there is not really any inhaling/smelling happening, just AE of sensation. I found the same with all the others too.

What I would like you to do is to read this thread from beginning to end…redoing exercises that you feel a pull to do and then report back on what you notice/insights.

1)

Experience itself (THIS/awareness/Knowing) is divided into 6 categories by thought only. Colour AND smell AND sensation AND taste AND smell AND thought AND sound. If you ignore those labels and the content of those labels….what remains?

What remains is everything as it’s always been anyway – soundthoughtsmelltastecoloursensation, all occurring at once and as one. There are not categories of experience, that is just a thought. Even soundthoughtsmelltastecoloursensation is just a label and doesn’t get close to the experience itself


2)

Focus on focussing, attention itself.
Do you move it, or it moves by itself?

It moves by itself. There is no ‘me’ to move it, nothing besides attention moving by itself

Hold focus on breath - see how it moves to thoughts, sensations, feelings, sounds.
Is this something you control?

No. almost every time I let the attention rest on the breath it would be focused on thought a few seconds later. There is no control over it. When the attention is being brought back onto the breath it feels like there is more of a ‘me’ moving it, but in fact there is not, just attention moving and a belief about ‘me moving it’. I suppose in truth there is not even really ‘attention moving’, because attention per se cannot be found in AE, and there is nothing really moving at all. There are just thoughts about ‘attention moving’.

What moves attention?

Nothing moves it. There is nothing there to move it.

Is thought in control of attention?

No. thought can’t control anything, it is just occurring the same as everything else. It’s weird because focus/attention seems like something that comes from the same place as thought ‘appears’ to originate (the head/mind), but when I look it is not really coming from anywhere, there is just the thought about a me doing the focusing and the tension in the head we talked about previously, which appears to suggest that ‘the brain’ is at work when focusing is happening, but really there’s no evidence it’s originating from anywhere.


3)

Is there an experience that the ’now’ is moving along the line of time?

No, time is just a thought/concept that overlays the ‘now’/AE. The ‘now’ isn’t going anywhere, and no such thing as time can be found in AE

Any experience of one ‘moment’ giving way to the next?

No, there are no such things as ‘moments’ in AE, are only thoughts about there being different ‘moments’. There is only really the now.

Any actual experience of one event following another?

No

How fast is the ‘present moment’ actually moving?

It is not moving at all, not going anywhere

Just look at 'this moment', can you find a point where it began?

No such point can be located

How long does the ‘now’ last?

There is no time to be found in AE, so there’s no amount of time that the ‘now’ can last. It just simply is

Where does the ‘now’ start, and where does it end?

There is no start and no end to be found, only the ‘now’ as It is. ‘start’ and ‘end’ are just thoughts/concepts, so there are only thoughts about a ‘start’ and an ‘end’

When does the ‘now’ exactly become the 'past'?

It doesn’t, there is only the ‘now’, no ‘past’ can be found in AE

What is the ‘past’ in actual experience?

There are only thoughts about the past, which are AE of thought. That’s it

So is there actual experience of ‘time’ or thoughts about ‘time’?

There is no AE of ‘time passing’, only thoughts about it


4)

Over the course of the next day or so, I'd like you to notice the content of thoughts. Whenever there is an arising thought or mental image, check whether its content (what it’s about, what it is pointing to) is REALLY happening, or the content is just pure imagination. Let me know how it goes.

I have only managed to try this a few times, and will continue it tomorrow, but I've noticed that most of what thought talks about cannot be found in AE. Here is an example: I was taking a shower and thought ‘that feels so much better’, so I investigated what ‘that’ was referring to and surmised it was ‘my body being clean’, which is just a thought-story, because neither 'body' nor 'cleanness' can be found in AE. And furthermore there is no ‘better’ to be found in AE, just thoughts about a 'body being clean' and the content of that thought which is that it is somehow ‘better’ than if the 'body' was not 'clean'


Beanstalk

[forgetmenot]

Hi Beanstalk,

1) How many things do you find? Are there two things - hand and table? Or is there simply AE of sensation?

There is only sensation. Thought is always portraying the images of 'hand' and 'table' as though to suggest they are there, but there is only AE of sensation and AE of thought, no 'hand' or 'table'[/color]

Okay, so there is no hand or table. Only experience which thought is labelling as sensation and colour. So can there be an experiencer of experience? Is there a ‘me’ that is experiencing some ‘thing’?

2) Do you notice 'one thing feeling another thing'? Or is there just 'sensation'?

There is nothing feeling anything else, but only AE of sensation

Yes…so what is it that SEEMS to feel sensations?

Look very carefully. Where does ‘feeling’ end and sensation begin? Can a dividing line between ‘feeling’ and sensation be found? Or is there just sensation?

there is no dividing line between feeling and sensation, there is only sensation and thought-stories about an I/body/hand that is feeling - there is no feeling or feeler to be found in AE

Yes, so when you see this when looking, how does it make your feel?

Thought is AE. Thought either points to AE or it points to thoughts about thought. If a though arises about a ‘blue sky’….the word ‘blue’ points to AE of colour…right? The word ‘sky’ points to AE of thought only. Can a ‘sky’ be found as AE?

yes, the word 'blue' points to AE of colour, but the word 'sky' is just a thought, and exists as thought only. There is no such thing as 'sky' in AE, only AE of thought. But in truth, the word 'blue', even though it points to AE of colour, is in itself also just AE of thought, right?

Yes, the label ‘blue’ is AE of thought. Without thought how could it possibly be known that what is appearing is something called colour and then further called ‘blue’? Actual experience is also a concept, because experience/THIS is not divided, but it’s useful in that it’s pointing to what is happening now, experience as you find it now, and not what is imagined.

1) Experience itself (THIS/awareness/Knowing) is divided into 6 categories by thought only. Colour AND smell AND sensation AND taste AND smell AND thought AND sound. If you ignore those labels and the content of those labels….what remains?

What remains is everything as it’s always been anyway – soundthoughtsmelltastecoloursensation, all occurring at once and as one. There are not categories of experience, that is just a thought. Even soundthoughtsmelltastecoloursensation is just a label and doesn’t get close to the experience itself

I don’t know what you mean when you say “soundthoughtsmelltastecoloursensation is just a label and doesn’t get close to the experience itself”. So can you explain this for me please.

How is soundthoughtsmelltastecoloursensation and different to the label experience/THIS/awareness/knowing/God? They are all pointing to what IS appearing exactly as it is.

If you look at a table, and for the sake of this experiment, let’s say it is the colour brown. Now totally ignore the label ‘table’ and you are then left with the label ‘brown’. Totally ignore the label ‘brown’ and you are left with the label ‘colour’. Now ignore the label ‘colour’ and what are you left with?

Hold focus on breath - see how it moves to thoughts, sensations, feelings, sounds.
Is this something you control?

No. almost every time I let the attention rest on the breath it would be focused on thought a few seconds later. There is no control over it. When the attention is being brought back onto the breath it feels like there is more of a ‘me’ moving it, but in fact there is not, just attention moving and a belief about ‘me moving it’. I suppose in truth there is not even really ‘attention moving’, because attention per se cannot be found in AE, and there is nothing really moving at all. There are just thoughts about ‘attention moving’.

Yes, exactly. There would have to be a someone or a something that is actually moving attention. Can anything be found that is doing this? Can a doer or any sort/description be found anywhere?

If a doer cannot be found and a thinker cannot be found, there how does free will, choice, decisions and responsibility fit into the picture?

What moves attention?

Nothing moves it. There is nothing there to move it.

Beautiful. So the idea of a separate self appears…as you have described in this post. Just because it SEEMS like attention is moving and attention now SEEMS to be placed on something called Beanstalk…does it a Beanstalk make?

And when you LOOK and see that Beanstalk does not really exist...how does that you feel...what happens?

Is thought in control of attention?

No. thought can’t control anything, it is just occurring the same as everything else. It’s weird because focus/attention seems like something that comes from the same place as thought ‘appears’ to originate (the head/mind), but when I look it is not really coming from anywhere, there is just the thought about a me doing the focusing and the tension in the head we talked about previously, which appears to suggest that ‘the brain’ is at work when focusing is happening, but really there’s no evidence it’s originating from anywhere.

It can seem to be quite convincing that thoughts and attention are coming from the head/forehead. But I want you to look carefully. Start to concentrate on a maths problem…or even a to do list or shopping list…so that you start to feel that thinking and attention is around the head/forehead area.

Now, whilst doing that…see if you can find an ACTUAL LINK that links the appearing thoughts and the sensation labelled as ‘forehead’, ‘thinking’ and ‘attention’.

3) Is there an experience that the ’now’ is moving along the line of time?

No, time is just a thought/concept that overlays the ‘now’/AE. The ‘now’ isn’t going anywhere, and no such thing as time can be found in AE

So what is ‘appearing’ is always here ie soundsensationsmelltastecolourthought…right?

What does the herenow point to?

4) Over the course of the next day or so, I'd like you to notice the content of thoughts. Whenever there is an arising thought or mental image, check whether its content (what it’s about, what it is pointing to) is REALLY happening, or the content is just pure imagination. Let me know how it goes.

I have only managed to try this a few times, and will continue it tomorrow, but I've noticed that most of what thought talks about cannot be found in AE. Here is an example: I was taking a shower and thought ‘that feels so much better’, so I investigated what ‘that’ was referring to and surmised it was ‘my body being clean’, which is just a thought-story, because neither 'body' nor 'cleanness' can be found in AE. And furthermore there is no ‘better’ to be found in AE, just thoughts about a 'body being clean' and the content of that thought which is that it is somehow ‘better’ than if the 'body' was not 'clean'

While doing this investigation…did you investigate what the body actually was at the same time? Did you break it down into AE?

Okay, one thing you said in your thread with Nina, is that the chaos that had started when you read Jed McKenna’s book fell away.

What I want you to do is to reflect back to before that chaos appeared to how you are now. I want you to note any differences. If life more peaceful, even if only for pockets of moments. Have some thoughts changed and some fallen away. How are emotions these days? Have a close look and let me know what you find. What do you find is different, what percepetion changes have happened?


Kay