Hello Vivien :)
I think there was a belief that the 5 senses are truth and thought is fantasy, therefore the movement of attention into fantasy is undesirable. It should be resisted. Movement into fantasy = bad.
Also, attention seems to move where it pleases. ‘I’ can’t control the movement of attention. (I can see while writing this, that ‘me’ is all over it.)
If reality moves as it pleases, how can there be seeing of the 5 senses ‘on cue’.
That can’t be controlled, can it?
When you say, ‘Look hard’, it doesn’t seem possible to just sit down and immediately ‘see’. Thoughts may be racing in streams. Should the thoughts themselves be looked at? Or should there be an effort to direct attention to the 5 senses. Or, should there be a letting go, and allowing attention to slow? (If that’s possible).
Today, it didn’t seem possible to just look on cue. So I let go. And stopped wrestling with attention. (‘Me’ again).
WHERE is this YOU that wants a better or more pleasant experience?
I can’t find the ‘me’.
WHAT is it EXACTLY that could REST in the simplicity of the 5 senses?
There have been moments of quiet and stillness today, where it is seen there is no me. Just emptiness and ease.
Is there SELF/YOU that could rest anywhere?
Not that I can see. No.
Is there the ‘simplicity of the 5 senses’ AND YOU?
There’s only an image, a shadow, and idea of ‘me’. It’s like ‘me’ has become a habit.
WHERE is the YOU that had was running away from the turmoil and the feeling of dismay and then finally it could rest in the relief and peace of the simplicity of the 5 senses?
It was imagined. It’s like ruts in a dirt road that steer the cart.
Can you see that there is still a belief that there is a ME/self which both the pleasant and the unpleasant experiences happening to?
And this me/I wants to get a more pleasant experience?
I see it. I understand. As I was writing the message, I could see it, but felt I was unable to extricate ‘myself’ from it.
Is seeing through the self is about ‘resting in the simplicity of the 5 senses’?
No, it’s about seeing the illusory nature of the ‘me/ I’.
What could rest there if there is no YOU?
YOU was back to the simplicity of the 5 senses?
It was an image that the ‘me’ assumed based on the memory of the ease of existence. ‘Me’ created an image in which it was there in that simple time of ease. That it was present.
WHERE is this you that can come and go into this simplicity?
It isn’t.
If the ‘I’ exist only in thought, then HOW could YOU be in and out of ANY state?
There is still a belief here that there is a YOU that could be in thought or in experience. Can you see this?
I see. That’s an important point for me to look at. The ‘me’ in thought is only an image, a shadow, an idea without any substance.
This also shows that there is still a belief in a self/YOU.
I don’t want to admit it. But yes, there’s still a feeling of a ‘me’ arising, and it is believed in.
Only an entity could be on a pendulum, swinging between peace and confusion. Can you see this?
Yes. I see.
This also shows that there is a YOU which sometimes talk from the state of illusion and some other times talks from the state of simplicity/peace.
Talking from the place of ‘no me’, there is no ‘me’ to claim anything.
Once it was truly seen clearly that there is no ‘me’, nothing claimed it.
Right now just seems like a resurgence of illusion. I felt that more time spent in the seeing of existence would help to weaken and dissolve the belief in the ‘me’
So there is a YOU that is sometimes lost in the illusion, and sometimes it’s outside of the illusion?
I feel like the lesson, the power of the seeing just hasn’t hit the core. There is certainly no ‘me’ in the seeing of simple existence.
WHERE is this YOU that could be lost in illusion?
Can’t find it.
I’m going to try to spend the evening just looking. Looking hard, if possible.
If the intention is sufficiently strong, is it possible to see existence on cue?
Thank you Vivien :)
