Trying to experience the nothing that I am

[PhilipJerzy]

Hi Vivien,

You have an idea of there being a subject of experience. Something that experiences. A feeler. But since you cannot find the feeler, but still believe in a subject, you make up all sorts of stories, like the body is feeling it, or sensations feeling themselves.

I really like this, it makes sense somehow. I cannot find the feeler but still believe in a subject, so all sorts of stories fill in the gap. But what believes in a subject? I guess that's what we're looking at today.

But what if there is no subject at all?

These first few pointers today didn't seem to bring anything up even though they sounded exciting on first read. When investigating this question all that comes up is a feeling of excitement, and some thoughts about wanting to see that there is no subject at all but not really seeing it. I also noticed each time this question was investigated there did "appear" to be a subject and within moments it was seen as a thought, or I'd ask that previous inquiry, "is this aware of what is going on," and it would become empty.

What if the subject-object split (experiencer-experienced, feeler-felt, seer-seen, hearer-heard) only coming from language, but it doesn’t exist in reality?

Same answer as above, nothing really appeared for this. It just feels blank as I say it out loud or investigate it, except for some occasional body sensation of what thoughts call excitement and maybe desiring.

I did like how it is phrased though. That it's only coming from language, not reality. It's just coming from how thoughts are phrased/appearing, not in truth. I want to investigate these deeper but I'm not sure how to look with these pointers.

What if there is no subject/experiencer at all?

Same thing here. I was repeating this all day, trying/hoping to see - what if there isn't?? I guess there's the question of "what was trying and hoping to see." While looking now I see it's just a thought saying "I want to see" and that thought 'isn't aware of what is really happening.' Regardless it just felt mostly blank all day.

The sensation isn't the feeler, it is what's felt. It feels like I stumbled here. Because if it's felt, who was feeling it. And when I ask that, it seems like the body is feeling it. It seems the idea of my body is me is where I'm getting stuck now, both in thoughts of the body and in sensations happening to the body.
The sensation isn't. But it seems like the body is. When I noticed this I kept asking. What in the body is aware and knows what's going on, what in the body is perceiving these sensations. And the only answer I keep getting it "the body."

What would you say about this now?

I think this was part of that same mix up as personality. That mix up being that it seemed like the personality was living its own life that wasn't "I" and so was the body. Like the body/personality was an entity of its own even though "I" wasn't it. Feeling and living but not "I."

But I see clearer now that there can't be an "I" anywhere. The body isn't a self whether that self is identified with or not. My above paragraph also begs the question "who feels the sensation, since it is 'felt.'" We investigated this yesterday with the hands and it is also clear that the sensations just are, the same way that heat was just heat when drinking tea.

The thought is still constantly arising "it is felt" as if there were a subject and with that it doesn't feel fully clear yet. But a moments investigation of each thought and it becomes clear for that moment that there is no 'feeler.' Just sensation.

Are sensations INSIDE the body?

Haha I wasn't even sure what you were referring to with these questions for a good portion of my first long looking session. There is no separation between inside and outside the body. There are sensations that might appear to be coming from what thoughts call inside the body. But with eyes closed there is only sensation. No differentiation between in or out, there is only what is felt.

What is the experience of the body? Isn’t the body itself just sensations?

Yes, I see the error of my statement. There is no "body." That is just a concept. It's almost as if I had an image of a bubble of personal space and everything within that bubble was "in the body." There is no experience of the body. There is only sensation as it arises. Thoughts may call it body.

Are there sensations for the body, and different type of sensations being INSIDE the body-sensations?

There is no separateness with the sensations. The imagined body cannot receive sensations or feel sensations. There are only sensations arising and thoughts saying the sensation is occurring in a "location" where "the body" is.

Wow really everything is thoughts.

Thanks Vivien,

I'm very curious about investigating that there is no subject/experiencer at all. There is constantly the illusion of a subject/experiencer... but what if there is no experiencer of the illusion? And everything is just happening on its own including illusion/thoughts of the illusion/noticing the thoughts of the illusion, all of it having no experiencer. That's what it seemed to lead to last night, but today didn't 'seem' very fruitful.

I'm very aware that every criticism of what's happening today is a "feels like/seems like/as if" statement.

Does that mean that everything is going well and thoughts about today are just believed? Or that there isn't even someone to be 'doing well' and that's just not noticed now. "Seems like" lots of thinking going on right now. I'll leave it at that before I give you too many easy opportunities for pointers Hahaha.

Thank you very much Vivien, its incredibly heartwarming to have someone on the other side, extending a hand.

Gracefully,

Philip

[Vivien]

Hi Philip,

Thank you very much Vivien, its incredibly heartwarming to have someone on the other side, extending a hand.

You are welcome :)

I'm very curious about investigating that there is no subject/experiencer at all.

We will look at this, but before there is another topic that needs to be looked at.

but what if there is no experiencer of the illusion? And everything is just happening on its own including illusion/thoughts of the illusion/noticing the thoughts of the illusion,

Let’s see if there is anything that is not just happening on its own.

Please sit for some time and just notice how everything is just happening effortlessly.

Look around.
What is being done for colors and shapes to be? Is there anything be done for colors and shapes to be, or they are just there effortlessly?

Listen to the sounds.
What is being done exactly for the sounds to be?
And when the attention is on a sound, what is being done to know the sound? Is there any doing? Or it’s just known effortlessly?

Now shift the focus on FEELING the body.
What is being done exactly for the body to be?
Is there any effort in being?
Or the body just IS, effortlessly?

Focus on the sensations of the hands.
What is being done for the sensations to be?
Aren’t the sensations happens effortlessly?

Look at the hands.
What is being done exactly for the image of the hand to be, to exist?
Is there a you making the image of the hands happen?
Is there any effort in seeing?

Now notice thoughts.
What is being done for thoughts to be?
Is there any effort for thoughts to appear? Or they just appear effortlessly?

Vivien

[PhilipJerzy]

Hi Vivien,

I looked throughout the day today but felt distracted and unable to concentrate. It feels like there is an avoidance of truly looking today. These pointers need more time I think. I was not able to notice how everything happens effortlessly.

I'll answer briefly in case you have some things to add but I think these need more time to saturate.

What is being done for colors and shapes to be? Is there anything be done for colors and shapes to be, or they are just there effortlessly?

As I look around colours and shapes just appear. There is nothing I can do to change colours or shapes, nothing I can do to affect them in any way. There "appears" to be a subject that is noticing or trying to notice that things are happening effortlessly and it's that subject that doesn't "appear to feel" effortless. But as I inquire into that, even that perception of effort arises effortlessly. The illusion of subject arises effortlessly as well. This is only clear when deeply looked at and otherwise there is that false sense of some sort of "doer" that's trying to notice things happen effortlessly.

My answer for most of the pointers today are along these lines.

Everything is happening effortlessly by itself with no involvement. And it "appears" the "I" is just trying to notice that it's happening effortlessly. But there is a deep "false sense" of separation today with these pointers that I haven't been able to clearly investigate. As if there is a "me" noticing that things outside the "me" are happening effortlessly but the "me" is putting in effort to notice.

And when the attention is on a sound

This seemed clear at times but sometimes like a self. That "attention" I mean. When attention is on something there is the illusion that "I" decided to focus on sounds instead of vision or sensation. When I look it is clear that I cannot choose where attention is placed, it just moves around from thing to thing. But it has that same illusion of self that personality did and the body did.

Needs more looking I guess. I get the feeling that I'm overlooking something right in front of me with these pointers but that I just don't have the will/strength/focus to actually look and see it. That's probably a big load of thought though.

Things seemed very not clear today so I will start fresh with these again tomorrow.

Thanks Vivien,

Philip

[Vivien]

Hi Philip,

I'd rather not comment yet. Please spend another day with these pointers, and let me know what you find.

Vivien

[PhilipJerzy]

Hi Vivien,

Today felt much more clear.

What is being done for colors and shapes to be? Is there anything be done for colors and shapes to be, or they are just there effortlessly?

It is effortless. Shapes and colours just are.

What is being done exactly for the sounds to be?
And when the attention is on a sound, what is being done to know the sound? Is there any doing? Or it’s just known effortlessly?

Nothing can be done for sounds to be. They just exist. Nothing needs to be done to know the sound, it is, in its hearing/existing, known effortlessly.

What is being done exactly for the body to be?
Is there any effort in being?
Or the body just IS, effortlessly?

The body just is. There is no effort to exist.

Focus on the sensations of the hands.
What is being done for the sensations to be?
Aren’t the sensations happens effortlessly?

Sensations are known without any effort or attempt to feel them. There is just the sensation.

What is being done exactly for the image of the hand to be, to exist?
Is there a you making the image of the hands happen?
Is there any effort in seeing?

Nothing is being done for the image of the hand to exist. There is no me making it appear there just is vision of something the thoughts call a hand. There is no effort in seeing. It is effortless with a grand seamlessness at times. Just nonstop vision without any self to see or any moment of seeing.

What is being done for thoughts to be?
Is there any effort for thoughts to appear? Or they just appear effortlessly?

Thoughts are constantly appearing effortlessly. The subject/content of the thoughts is changing without effort. The focus of the thoughts are changing without effort. The changing of attention/what sensation seems strongest is also happening on its own. There is no me deciding to do the pointer about vision and no me deciding to change to the pointer about sound. Things are simply happening. Often with thoughts commenting with the word "I." But today those thoughts have seemed empty of any real "I," for the most part.

I started looking for what really is happening instead of focusing so much on what I "think" should be or trying to unravel what I've always imaged is happening. From this perspective it seems a lot more clear that things just happen with no doer or decider, and also that there is never a real "I." I wouldn't say thats completely clear yet, but it has seemed a lot clearer today.

It's like you said, you can't see the unicorn in your room that isn't there. This whole time it feels like I've been looking for this unicorn to try to see that it's not there instead of just looking around and seeing what is here.

Excited to keep looking, Thank you like always for you patience and deep questioning.

Gracefully,

Philip

[Vivien]

Hi Philip,

It's like you said, you can't see the unicorn in your room that isn't there. This whole time it feels like I've been looking for this unicorn to try to see that it's not there instead of just looking around and seeing what is here.

It’s good that you’ve discovered this.

What is the difference between doing and happening?

Is the separate self doing anything in life?
Or is it given? As an idea? Or as an entity?

Is it possible that everything (with no exception) is just happening?

What do you do right now for this to be?

Are you doing reading or reading is happening?
Are you doing sitting or sitting is happening?
Are you doing seeing or seeing is happening?

Vivien

[PhilipJerzy]

Hi Vivien,

It’s good that you’ve discovered this.

I'm noticing there is actually a lot less actually happening than was always imagined. There is what's happening with the 5 senses and all that happening is so calm. Theres no thing to it. And on top of that there are concepts on top of concepts creating the illusion of busy-ness and complexity and situations and opinions. Sometimes this is seen immediately and sometimes it's not realized until later. I got upset over some food I was making today and ten minutes later I noticed I was still thinking about how I was upset. And I started looking what was actually happening. There wasn't even the sensation of upset anymore. Just an empty thought referring to an I that wasn't there. I have been noticing for a while but it wasn't very clear until today, this belief/thought that there is something like a storage place for what's happened to "me." That since "I was upset" earlier, that's stored someplace and saved, and so I have to be upset because what what happened exists. But there is nothing like that. There is no "real" collection of events that happened to "me" or storage of "what I think or belief." No perceptible memory bank of opinions. A thought can reoccur but each time it appears spontaneously rather than being drawn from this storage of "who I am."

And so thoughts were less "identified" with today. And when it did "seem" like an "I" was present, that idea was happening on it's own. There was no "I" that was "being" there was just thoughts of "I" that weren't being investigated. and then when they were investigated that investigation happened on it's own as well. It all still doesn't seem crystal clear but it is definitely clearer. Just looking again and again.

What is the difference between doing and happening?

"Doing" is just a thought story about happening. It does not exist in reality.

Is the separate self doing anything in life?
Or is it given? As an idea? Or as an entity?

It's almost difficult to imagine a separate self when looking at this question. The idea of a separate self appears but that idea is given. Spontaneously arising.

Is it possible that everything (with no exception) is just happening?

The (with no exception) made me stay with this extra long. It seems clear that what is noticeable is happening. There is nothing to be found that isn't just happening.

My family was talking today about how when you want to change your life you have to change your environment. And this made me pause and investigate for a while. It "appeared" for a moment that my whole life I have been doing things. That everyone does things all the time. I've been trying to change this or that. And for that moment it just "seemed" impossible that all of that was just an idea. Like what are all the self help books about, and how come they work? At times when I've felt down and "I cleaned" my room, I felt better after. It "felt" so real that my whole life "I have" been doing things.

BUT

There is SO much conceptualizing there. I can't actually know any of that. Let alone that it's from the past, but if I clean my room and then feel better. There is no ACTUAL connection between the two things. There is just sensation as it arises. Appearing to change from moment to moment perhaps but not being caused by any action. Plus there is no "I" that can decide to clean my room. It just happens and there is thinking about it.

I sat with this for even longer to make sure it was clear. And what was found is that something happens. This hand moves, or the breath gets more focus than thoughts. And there's an extremely subtle thought stating "I chose this." It didn't seem as loud or noticeable as thoughts that appear throughout the day, but it was still just an empty, flat thought. As everything unfolds, that little thought is constantly arising and unquestioned. But just because it's a story of doing doesn't mean there is any doing.

To answer the question, I cannot find anything that is NOT just happening, though it does not always "seem" this way.

What do you do right now for this to be?

Absolutely nothing. Life just is.

Are you doing reading or reading is happening?
Are you doing sitting or sitting is happening?
Are you doing seeing or seeing is happening?

I looked at this throughout the day as I did anything. At first it always "appeared" that "I" was doing reading/cooking/seeing etc. But within a few moments of asking it was always clearly just happening.

Thanks Vivien,

Gracefully,

Philip

[Vivien]

Hi Philip,

I'm noticing there is actually a lot less actually happening than was always imagined. There is what's happening with the 5 senses and all that happening is so calm. Theres no thing to it. And on top of that there are concepts on top of concepts creating the illusion of busy-ness and complexity and situations and opinions.

Yes, nice observation.

A thought can reoccur but each time it appears spontaneously rather than being drawn from this storage of "who I am."

Exactly!

There is SO much conceptualizing there.

And do you think that this should change?
Or is it enough to see if for what it is, just thoughts floating by?

Does conceptualization should stop or significantly lessen in order to see that there is no doer?

Is conceptualization is being done, or it’s also happens automatically and effortlessly?

I looked at this throughout the day as I did anything. At first it always "appeared" that "I" was doing reading/cooking/seeing etc. But within a few moments of asking it was always clearly just happening.

All right. Please look at this more, to really let it sink in.

Look around, all colours are given, they are happening. It’s not that the me-character can choose and make colours that are present into different ones. Or choose not to see green and see pink instead. Colours are happening. Shapes are happening. Sounds are happening.

What about sensations? Are they happening or the me-character doing them?
And how about feelings? Are they something the me-character does or something that is given?

Now look, what is not given?

Is the me-character doing anything in life?
Or is it given? As an idea? Or as an entity?

Vivien

[PhilipJerzy]

Hi Vivien,

And do you think that this should change?
Or is it enough to see if for what it is, just thoughts floating by?

No it doesn't need to change. There is a thought describing a desire for it be noticed as imagination more often, but as I look there is no such desire in reality.

When it is "seen for what it is," the thoughts fall away quickly. When there is a big dramatic story in a thought and suddenly peaceful calm reality is seen, then that thought sort of just stops. It doesn't keep building. Like the interest or energy in seeing where the thoughts will lead dissipates. There is no doing of stopping thoughts or of noticing reality. Sometimes focus just shifts from "believing" thoughts to noticing reality including thoughts. At that point thoughts come a lot less often and the thoughts that do come have no bearing on reality and don't really draw the attention much. Until the focus shifts back to the next dramatic story.

Does conceptualization should stop or significantly lessen in order to see that there is no doer?

On the contrary, it is "seen" most often in the middle of conceptualization. Like today, I was mowing grass (mowing grass was happening haha) and there was a dramatic thought story about something or other, and suddenly the reality of the body moving, the sight of nature and of grass being cut, the smell of the grass, the itch of the sun.. the reality of it all became noticed for a moment and that juxtaposition of reality against the thought story is what makes the thought story and conceptualization seem so false and unrelated to reality. In these moments like I said, the thought story does seem to significantly lessen once it is seen as thoughts, but it does not need to lessen for it to be seen that there is no doer.

It does "seem" that it's easier when thoughts lessen. When thoughts are dramatic and the main focus, there are long periods where they are 'believed' and life goes on with the thought story of "I." But reality is constantly present through this illusion, reality is present in the very "knowing" of the thoughts, it is just seldom realized.

Is conceptualization is being done, or it’s also happens automatically and effortlessly?

Conceptualization is happening with no doing. Even the imagined thought of "I" does not claim control over conceptualization. It is very clearly just arising. Just present.

What about sensations? Are they happening or the me-character doing them?

The me-character isn't doing anything. How can "I" "do" a sensation. They are commented about in a thought of "I," but they are felt effortlessly and seamlessly. Sensations don't even happen "to" a body. With my eyes closed there are just indescribable sensations with concepts placed on them arising from nothing.

I was sun-tanning for a few minutes today and for a moment it "seemed" like "I am hot." But with a quick look it's seen that sensation is just known. There is no "I" that is receiving it or doing anything to know it. It simply is. And there is no such thing as "hot," just the sensation as it is known in that moment.

And how about feelings? Are they something the me-character does or something that is given?

Yesterday after writing my reply, I sat and inquired for a few hours and got so frustrated with a lack of progress.

Until I noticed reality happening alongside my thoughts about it. There was no feeling of frustration. There was no "REAL" desire to be liberated. There was just dramatic thoughts about "I don't get this" "I have to try harder" "I don't know how" etc.

It was all an imagining. hahahah. There was no one that wants to be liberated. The words were just given, arising, tumbling out of nothing again and again. In this case there was no actual feeling. I noticed this over and over again today. While mowing the lawn after noticing that distracting thought story I mentioned above, I had the thought, "wow it's such a joy to just be outside cutting grass." But when checking the body there was no feeling of joy either, just thoughts commenting.

There is a constant feeling of being content when reality becomes the focus. And that feeling is given. There is nothing done to feel, there is just feeling.

Now look, what is not given?

When looking I can't imagine something not given. If something were to be "done" and not given, the knowledge of everything would have to be known ahead of time. And then that knowing would be given. So even hypothetically everything is given.

There is nothing that is not given. But the truth of that statement isn't trusted fully. There hasn't been a total realization that everything is given. Almost non-stop today the question was being investigated. Am I sitting or is sitting happening. Am I writing or is writing happening. Am I eating or is eating happening. And always it is happening, but that is only seen once the question is asked.

Is the me-character doing anything in life?
Or is it given? As an idea? Or as an entity?

The me character cannot do anything. I have not found one thing that "I" can actually do. It is all given. The thoughts with "I" are given, the situations and concepts are given, the momentary opinions are given. The arising of thoughts called memories are given. The 'I" cannot choose for anything to actually happen. The "I" is just thoughts about things that are arising.



The investigation was happening non-stop today. Mostly in the form of noticing what is REALLY happening in reality vs what's happening as thoughts. Every minute or so focus changes from thought story to vision/sensation and the momentum of thinking stops for that moment. Over and over again today it was seen that what "appears" to be going on and what "seems" important in any given moment has actually nothing to do with what is going on.

And this thought stating "I still haven't got it, I still don't get it." keeps arising but reality has nothing to get. Reality doesn't need to achieve liberation, there is nothing BUT liberation. There is nothing but reality. I had a teacher once tell me that I should do an inquiry on "I am already enlightened" or something along those lines. Or something like "I can't be enlightened in the future, I can only become enlightened now." At the time I DID NOT get what he was saying. All I could think was, "but I'm not enlightened now so its gotta happen later, I'm not enlightened now, I'm not I'm not." Hahaha. I see clearly now that as thoughts like that arise now, they are arising as thoughts not as truths. And in reality there are no problems about liberation. There is no one who wants to be liberated or even anyone TO be liberated.

Hahahaha. Nonetheless life goes on believing in an "I" somewhere between the lines.

Thanks for your help like always. This is great.

Love,

Philip

[PhilipJerzy]

Hi Vivien,

Just had a particularly "enlightening" investigation.

With a partner I started looking directly at that idea of being liberated for that moment when thoughts are known as thoughts. If the only thing between liberation and "identification" was that thought being investigated.

It led to that core frustration which appeared as the thought "but what if the next thought is believed." It "seemed" like "sure for now there is no self but in a moment there might be identification with imagination."

After staying with just that, and deeply looking I realized "I was trying to control" the next thought. That is what "appeared" to be a doing. Suddenly "I" realized: "There is nothing I can do to control the next thought, there is nothing I can do to control whether the next thought is seen as a thought or believed."

And wow. What a relief. "I" have no control over enlightenment, or liberation or anything. It is just completely unfolding. I just can't get over this sense of relief. All this apparent "trying."

The next thought will either be believed and then investigated, or believed for a bit longer and then investigated, or not investigated for a long time. It almost doesn't even matter, "I" have nothing to do with it. "I'm" free of it.

But then "I" started thinking. Aren't all thoughts already known? What is this line of thinking about a thought being known as a thought... Wouldn't that just be a thought about a thought? The answer "I" arrived at was that when reality is noticed alongside the thought, when sensations are felt or sounds or sight - then the thoughts don't "appear" so singular. The reality of now is seen alongside the thought and so the content of the thought is seen as being irrelevant.

And there is no control over where focus is, the "I" isn't "doing" that either.

It's all just unfolding.

It's wonderful.

It doesn't even matter if "I" can still see this later or tomorrow or in a year. It's all just unfolding without an "I" doing it.

"I" feel a lot of relief.

Thanks Vivien, excited to hear your feedback and next questions.

Love,

Philip

[Vivien]

Hi Philip,

You did an excellent investigation :)

There is nothing that is not given. But the truth of that statement isn't trusted fully. There hasn't been a total realization that everything is given. Almost non-stop today the question was being investigated. Am I sitting or is sitting happening. Am I writing or is writing happening. Am I eating or is eating happening. And always it is happening, but that is only seen once the question is asked.

What would you say now?
There is nothing that is not give. – How does it feel when you read this sentence?

The next thought will either be believed and then investigated, or believed for a bit longer and then investigated, or not investigated for a long time. It almost doesn't even matter, "I" have nothing to do with it. "I'm" free of it.

What/who is it exactly that is free of whether a thought is believed or not?

And when a concern appears of ‘what if the next thought will be believed?’, then what/who is it exactly that is concerned of it?

Is there someone or something being affected by taking a thought to be real?

Do thoughts (believed or not) happen to someone or something?

Vivien

[PhilipJerzy]

Hi Vivien,

The looking was a lot less actively driven today, mostly just noticing reality amidst a stream of thoughts. What I found most interesting today was when judgements were coming up, and reality was noticed, that judgement wasn't happening in reality. Just a thought. Sometimes these judgement were very rude. But those words had nothing backing them up, maybe some more thoughts, maybe some subtle sensations, but nothing really like judgement. There can be no real judgment. There is just the pure awareness that feels so very gentle. A thought would arise like "this person is ugly," or "this person is dumb," just passive thoughts floating by and believed when un-inspected. But with the awareness on sensations and sight etc when noticing the thought there is no ugliness present. There is no dumbness present. Just life. It's quite beautiful, there is so much beauty and life in what the thought called ugly. I can see how this will continue to be a process for some time. There is constant noticing of thoughts, concepts, judgements, that seemed so real for this whole life and suddenly they are seen as thoughts. I suspect this as well needs to be noticed again and again. As well as deeper and deeper.

What would you say now?
There is nothing that is not given. – How does it feel when you read this sentence?

It is mostly quiet when I read this sentence. Throughout the day I investigated this and sometimes a thought would arise asking "but are you sure???" but it is quite quickly noticed as a thought. There isn't really a belief that everything is given. There is simply not much opposition, just that occasional thought. It isn't really something that's thought about, things just unfold. It is becoming clearer and clearer at times. I would try and "do" something, anything, set an intention, think a thought, move a hand. But the very idea of it comes out of nothing in the first place. Its immediately clear when looking closely and mostly clear when investigating isn't happening.

What/who is it exactly that is free of whether a thought is believed or not?

The first time I read these next pointers I thought maybe I just misspoke, or over spoke. But it's very clear there is an error in perception here. As if the self still exists, it's just not "doing" anything. But of course this needs to be investigated. I see it's just another familiar thought. With the word "I." Momentarily "appearing" as the illusion of an I. I didn't find this all day but now as I'm looking I can see this. There is only what is arising now, there is nothing that can be affected by thoughts that can be free of them.

And when a concern appears of ‘what if the next thought will be believed?’, then what/who is it exactly that is concerned of it?

That concern hasn't arisen at all today. The thought that appears is "it doesn't matter if the next thought is believed ...I... have nothing to do with it."

I can see that there is an error here as well. Who has nothing to do with thoughts, do thoughts have anything to do with anything or are they simply appearing. It's just incredible how multifaceted this is.

I can see that in reality there is no one. Just what is present. So what if the next thought is believed? Well it's just believed, or rather, that's just where the focus is. Without anyone choosing the focus, and without the direction of the focus affecting "anyone."

Is there someone or something being affected by taking a thought to be real?

This is the pointer that really made me stop and double check what was going on. When I first read this it "felt" like yes. Wow and right now as I took a few minutes to look at this deeply, I can see there is just a thought arising. Nothing else. No magical manifestation of being just because that thought "appeared" true. There is NOTHING that is not given. As that becomes more and more clear and as it's noticed more often it leaves no place for the "I" to be. It just becomes another flat thought.

Throughout the day this wasn't as clear. It "seemed" that when the illusion is believed that it's like an "I" gets created and is affected by the thoughts.

I can clearly see that's impossible right now. But it may be good to look at this a bit more to really get clear with it.

Do thoughts (believed or not) happen to someone or something?

Ah I can see another error here. There "seems" to be an experiencer of the thoughts. Through the day as I was looking I could tell I wasn't getting to the bottom of this pointer but now I see it. That separateness. Perhaps imaginary but it needs to be seen as such before I can authentically claim its imaginary.

I'm asking "how is the experiencer of thoughts experienced" "Who or what is experiencing thoughts"

This will take some more time looking deeply I see.

Thank you for the great pointers and your thoroughness.

Gracefully,

Philip

[Vivien]

Hi Philip,

You did excellent observations on judgments.

Throughout the day this wasn't as clear. It "seemed" that when the illusion is believed that it's like an "I" gets created and is affected by the thoughts.
I can clearly see that's impossible right now. But it may be good to look at this a bit more to really get clear with it.

Yes, it can seem as if an I being created, but is this ever the case?
Is a seeming I a real I, ever?

And how does this seeming I appear, in what form?

There "seems" to be an experiencer of the thoughts. Through the day as I was looking I could tell I wasn't getting to the bottom of this pointer but now I see it. That separateness. Perhaps imaginary but it needs to be seen as such before I can authentically claim its imaginary.

Let’s look into this.

Where would this experiencer of thoughts would be? In the head?
Do you find an experiencer in the head?
Can you find an exact location where a thought is known or experienced FROM?

When a thought appears it is automatically known.
But is there something or someone knowing / experiencing thoughts?

Is there a thought + the knowing of it? Are these two things? Or are these just different ways of describing the same happening; thoughts appearing?

Is there a knower or experiencer separate from a thought?
Or knowing of a thought is inherent to the thought itself?

Isn’t the happening of a thought IS ALREADY the knowing of it?

Is a thought experienced, or the thought is known directly by its existence / presence?

Vivien

[PhilipJerzy]

Hi Vivien,

Yes, it can seem as if an I being created, but is this ever the case?
Is a seeming I a real I, ever?

No, I have not found any evidence of any I ever. Today as the focus would shift from identified with thinking to the reality of a moment, I started noticing that the "I" that has always felt so real "feels" a lot less real. It is noticed as just the word "I" with nothing actually backing it up. The "power" of the "I" thoughts are somehow diminished.

As I go through my day, solving problems, imagining a future or a past, judging, having opinions: all those thoughts seem a lot more flat even when there is no "THINKING" about noticing reality or not. When investigation starts happening and thoughts say "I was identified" even the word identified seems to be losing meaning. Identified with what? and what was identified? The difference between "being identified" and not "being identified" seems diminished.

I've been having a strangely hard time even understanding what an "I" is today. After asking todays pointers over and over and thinking that the "I" seems real, I started wondering... Wait what seems real? I kept answering the question assuming that an "I" is felt/known because nothing about how I feel has really changed. Suddenly I couldn't stop thinking "what is this "I" that I keep assuming is perceived" "What does "I" even mean." If it hasn't been defined how can I expect to know if it is there or not.

And I guess what we call an "I" is a separate self."

But in reality the words separate self is a concept only. I cannot see separate self. I can see a body but that tells me nothing about separate self, only thoughts say this body is separate from things around it. Vision is just vision. I can't hear a separate self. I can't feel a separate self. I can feel sensations but sensations alone cannot equal separate self, only thoughts can talk about the sensations meaning that. and I certainly can't smell or taste separate self. I can think that since this body doesn't taste when another body eats then I am separate from them. But that is all thought.

As I do this experiment I see all this, and still the thought "But this isn't it yet" arises and mostly it is believed. As I notice reality around it I see there is nothing to believe it, just the vision and sensation of a body sitting in bed.

I guess what I'm getting at is that it isn't just an obvious fact that there is no self. I can investigate like I did above and notice there is no place for a self in reality. But the fact hasn't been "realized" yet.

Admittedly, I was looking very often through the day, but I didn't get a chance for a longer/deeper session today so I could be missing something.

Wow that was a long answer... makes me think there is a lot of thinking going on.. hahah

And how does this seeming I appear, in what form?

When reality is noticed there still "seems" to be a separation. As I'm looking at my dog right now it isn't instantly obvious that seeing is instantly known. There is still some sort of delay. Or rather there are thoughts about believing there is a delay. I understand that the very seeing of this dog fur is the knowing of it. It cannot be any other way. Maybe there is some expectation of something being different when it's realized that there is no separation. But I also "understand" that it cannot be any different because right NOW the fur is seen. This isn't about an altered state, this is just the natural state, everything is as it is. So I'm not even sure what I don't understand here. Maybe there is entirely too much "understanding" happening today, and not enough looking.

I haven't been able to sleep the past few nights, as soon as I try to sleep investigation starts happening and it happens all night. Just a constant noticing of reality, noticing that the thoughts about tiredness are illusions, noticing the sensations that thoughts call tiredness, noticing sounds, noticing when thoughts drift into identification and when reality becomes clearer again, noticing thoughts chattering emptily. It's very good, but I find it hard to look deeply through the day when I'm more tired than usual.

Maybe I should stop answering here today. I think the rest of the questions will be answered the same way. With understanding instead of with looking. These pointers need to be seen and saturated more fully.

I would appreciate your thoughts on what I wrote. On one hand it "seems" like "ok this is reality, right now, nothing needs to change, everything is just happening, anything else is just thoughts on top of this." But on the other hand my (perhaps imagined) experience is that there is an experiencer.

Is it just the thought "there is an experiencer"?

How can I investigate this better?

Thanks Vivien, for the great pointers and for reading through my rambling,

Love,

Philip

[Vivien]

Hi Philip,

I guess what I'm getting at is that it isn't just an obvious fact that there is no self. I can investigate like I did above and notice there is no place for a self in reality. But the fact hasn't been "realized" yet.

And how would that realization would look like? What is it that you imagine?

What is it exactly you expect to happen, other than repeatedly seeing that there is no inherent, self-governing self?

Suddenly I couldn't stop thinking "what is this "I" that I keep assuming is perceived" "What does "I" even mean." If it hasn't been defined how can I expect to know if it is there or not.

How do you expect to see that there is no unicorn in the room with you?
What do you need to do in order to know with certainty that there is no unicorn standing next to you?

How would you see the absence of a non-existent thing?
What other proof do you need then seeing that it’s simply not there?
Isn’t not seeing/finding the person is = the absence of a person?

Please go to your bed now, please do it.
Lean forward, and look under your bed.

Is there a monster under your bed?
Isn’t not being able to find a monster under your bed, is equal to the absence of a monster?

Please literally do it, don’t just think it through.

After this little exercise, sit down, and close your eyes.
Imagine a unicorn in the room with you. Imagine it as vividly as you can.
Then open your eyes, and search through the whole room for this unicorn.

Can you find it? If not, isn’t it because it’s simply not there, since it’s simply doesn’t exist?

Now experiment with a dinosaur, and then with Santa, not a person being dressed as Santa, but the REAL Santa.

When reality is noticed there still "seems" to be a separation.

Where is the dividing line between me and not-me?
How does the dividing line itself experienced?

Is it just the thought "there is an experiencer"?
How can I investigate this better?

The pointers for investigating this is in my previous post.

Vivien