Conceptual Understanding vs Experiential Knowing

[pockets]

Is there a thinker of thoughts ?

If I can see that thoughts just come, and I am not picking the thought, then the notion of a "thinker" doesn't exist. I am the observer of thoughts and feelings and sensations. I am the thing that allows those things to be observed.

Is there a you making things happen ?Is there a you in any shape or form ?

There isn't a "me" in the way that I think about in the content of my thoughts. But there is something that is here, otherwise there wouldn't be a something to acknowledge this. The thing that is here is very hard to describe. The "thing" that is here is not physical or mental, but all things physical and mental are within this thing, exist as part of this thing. The "thing" is constantly changing, and "I" can watch it change.. So when you ask if there is a "you", i don't know if I would describe this as "me"... but it doesn't feel like /not/ me.

Apologies, I am struggling to put this into words in the way I experience them exactly.

[warissem]

Hi pockets

If I can see that thoughts just come, and I am not picking the thought, then the notion of a "thinker" doesn't exist.

You are constructing a logical assumption (if ....., then ....). Does it mean that you were not doing the observation of thoughts when I gave you the exercises. Before giving an answer, you need to be certain of its truth, it means that the answer is seen as you are seeing this screen.

I am the observer of thoughts and feelings and sensations. I am the thing that allows those things to be observed.

There is no you to be an observer. Look again at what is happening.

There isn't a "me" in the way that I think about in the content of my thoughts.

They are not your thoughts. Is there a you which owns thoughts ?

But there is something that is here, otherwise there wouldn't be a something to acknowledge this. The thing that is here is very hard to describe. The "thing" that is here is not physical or mental, but all things physical and mental are within this thing, exist as part of this thing. The "thing" is constantly changing, and "I" can watch it change.. So when you ask if there is a "you", i don't know if I would describe this as "me"... but it doesn't feel like /not/ me.

Yes, we can say that there is "something" here that cannot be described and is not known through the five senses. You said "The "thing" is constantly changing, and "I" can watch it change" : now, can you describe a changing of this "thing" ? And what is this "I" which is watching the changes ?

Apologies, I am struggling to put this into words in the way I experience them exactly.

Is there a you which is struggling ?

Is there a you which is experiencing things ?

In the last post, you forget to answer to these questions :

is there a hearer of sounds ?
Is there a seer of sights ?
Is there a doer of deeds ?

Warissem

[pockets]

Hi Warissem,

Does it mean that you were not doing the observation of thoughts when I gave you the exercises. Before giving an answer, you need to be certain of its truth, it means that the answer is seen as you are seeing this screen.

It's hard for me to say that I've seen /anything/ as clearly as I am seeing this screen, so perhaps none of my answers thus far have been to that level of certainty. I apologize, it is not my intention to be misinterpreting your exercises. I appreciate your patience pointing out when I am misunderstanding the instructions, it is helpful.

There is no you to be an observer. Look again at what is happening.

When looking today, there is not an observer as a separate "thing". There are thoughts, then sounds, then feelings, and they are all there is in specific moment. I can see thoughts rationalizing experiences, and those thoughts feel "real" until that moment of recognition of labels/stories that happen. But there is haziness between the direct experience and thoughts still, I still find myself "catching" "myself" thinking.

They are not your thoughts. Is there a you which owns thoughts ?

There is no owning of the thoughts, the thoughts just come and go.

can you describe a changing of this "thing" ? And what is this "I" which is watching the changes ?

The "thing" is just whatever sensation/thought exists at that moment. It can be colors/feelings/etc. The changing is happening no matter what, without any interference from any "me". There isn't an "I" which is watching it change because there is only the "thing" itself. I cant describe the actual changing of this "thing", I don't know with certainty, I don't see it change, I just see the before and after (sometimes very quickly).

Is there a you which is struggling ?

No, the thing cannot struggle. The only struggling is in a very convincing thought. The thought feels so real though, it feels like direct experience. I can see it is not the same, momentarily. Then when I try to type these words to explain it, I can no longer feel it the same way, and it's like I'm trying to explain something I cannot hold.

Is there a you which is experiencing things ?

There is definitely experiencing happening, but the experiencing comes before the "I", and the experiencing does not need the "I" to "exist".

is there a hearer of sounds ?

The sounds are just the "thing" in a given moment. There isn't a hearer, because there isn't anything other than those sounds in that moment. Then immediately after that "moment" there is a thought that says "I" hear.

Is there a seer of sights ?

Similar to the sounds, the sights are just the "thing" in a given moment. There isn't a seer, because there isn't anything other than those sights in that moment. Then immediately after that "moment" there is a thought that says "I" see.

Is there a doer of deeds ?

I don't know, I really cannot see this clearly at this time.


Thank you,

[warissem]

Hi pockets

Thank you for the answers. I'll come back with comments in short. Meanwhile, there is an exercise for you :

Go out into nature and spend some time watching the movement of the whole. See how clouds move, trees swing, leaves wiggle, grass moves, insects, birds - all move all the time.

Then move focus to sensations and see how they too are in constant motion, thoughts come and go, sounds, colours, sensations come and go.

Notice that everything is part of one movement.

Then close your eyes and see if there is a line between you and out there, between you and life itself. If yes, where is the boundary?
Is there an inside and an outside of Life?
Is there something which is not included in the movement of the whole?
Is there a witness that is watching life happening from a distance?
Is witnessing part of the one movement too?
Is there anything which is not just happening?

Go out, come back and tell me what you found.

Warissem

[pockets]

Hi Warissem,

Thank you for sharing this exercise. I have spent time today outside doing as you instructed, but need more time to be more certain in my findings. i will respond in greater detail shortly.

thank you!

[warissem]

Hi pockets

Some commentaries about your last post. In general, you have done good observations.

But there is haziness between the direct experience and thoughts still, I still find myself "catching" "myself" thinking.

Yes, this is ordinary. Thoughts are still here after seeing through the illusion of a separate self. "I" and "me" thoughts will continue to arise but now you know that there are only thoughts without a substance.

The "thing" is just whatever sensation/thought exists at that moment. It can be colors/feelings/etc. The changing is happening no matter what, without any interference from any "me". There isn't an "I" which is watching it change because there is only the "thing" itself. I cant describe the actual changing of this "thing", I don't know with certainty, I don't see it change, I just see the before and after (sometimes very quickly).

I don't understand what it is meant by a"thing". Do you mean the knowing principle, awareness ? It is not a thing. As an analogy, we can say : It is like a sky, limitless, non born, ... a conscious sky. It is impersonal. It is unchanging.

Continue with the exercise.

Warissem

[pockets]

Hi Warissem,

Im having trouble describing what I saw today in words. It felt like there wasn't room for anything other than what I was experiencing, it felt like thats all there was.

I don't understand what it is meant by a"thing". Do you mean the knowing principle, awareness ? It is not a thing. As an analogy, we can say : It is like a sky, limitless, non born, ... a conscious sky. It is impersonal. It is unchanging.

Yes, exactly. The "thing" is the knowing principle, that's a better was of describing.

Then close your eyes and see if there is a line between you and out there, between you and life itself. If yes, where is the boundary?

I don't feel a line. I dont feel a distance or boundary, i can only see a boundary in the contents of my thoughts, when i "catch myself" thinking.

Is there an inside and an outside of Life?

No i havent experienced anything outside of this. I don't know what that would mean, there is only this that is within this, i dont know a better way to explain what "it" feels like.

Is there something which is not included in the movement of the whole?

all that is included is what is happening at that moment, but it feels like I can only feel any one piece at a time.

Is there a witness that is watching life happening from a distance?

i dont experience any distance of any kind, it just feels like its there/here.

Is witnessing part of the one movement too?

I dont fully know. I have a thought that explains what I feel, but that is all i have at this moment, not certainty.

Is there anything which is not just happening?

I feel sensations coming and going very fast today. I felt sensations in my left finger, then sensations in my right finger, one at a time. Then the sensations started alternating very very quickly, like all there was was a single sensation, and nothing else happening at any moment, and the next moment the awareness could be on a thought/feeling/sensation/whatever. There was nothing which is not just happening at a given time.


Thank you,

[warissem]

Hi pockets

Im having trouble describing what I saw today in words. It felt like there wasn't room for anything other than what I was experiencing, it felt like thats all there was.

There is no you having trouble, there is only seeing. There is no you experiencing : is it true ?

No i havent experienced anything outside of this. I don't know what that would mean, there is only this that is within this, i dont know a better way to explain what "it" feels like.

It is life living itself.

all that is included is what is happening at that moment, but it feels like I can only feel any one piece at a time.

Are there other places outside of thought ?

i dont experience any distance of any kind, it just feels like its there/here.

Yes, good observation.

I dont fully know. I have a thought that explains what I feel, but that is all i have at this moment, not certainty.

There is no you which has thoughts and no you that feels. There is thinking and feeling without you. Do you see that ?

Is there a witness outside of thought ?


Warissem

[pockets]

Hi Warissem,

Thank you for your responses. Before I answer your questions, I wanted to point out something that I noticed today. Today while looking to my experience to answer your questions, it felt "harder" to see things clearly like I did yesterday... Yesterday the answers I gave felt so obvious and true to me. And today while looking, I felt less convinced/100% certain. I don't know why this is, but I wanted to share. I will continue to look at the questions you have given, but these are the answers based on what I see now.

There is no you having trouble, there is only seeing. There is no you experiencing : is it true ?

The only "me" having trouble is a convincing thought that sometimes prevents "me" from being fully "convinced". Even though conceptually I "understand" that there is only seeing... after SEEING that in direct experience, a conceptual understanding feels just like thoughts that are unsatisfactory (which is also a thought). I can see the difference very clearly between thoughts and seeing this directly now.

It is life living itself.

This phrasing makes sense

all that is included is what is happening at that moment, but it feels like I can only feel any one piece at a time.

Are there other places outside of thought ?

Can you please clarify this question? What do you mean by other places? This "knowing principle" feels like the only place that there is.

There is no you which has thoughts and no you that feels.There is thinking and feeling without you. Do you see that ?

I can feel that there is no "me" that HAS thoughts. There are thoughts and there are feelings that are being experienced.

Is there a witness outside of thought ?

I can see that there is no witness outside or within this "knowing principle". The only witness is within the content of a thought, which doesn't "belong" to anything/anyone.


Upon awaiting you response, I will spend more time with the last exercise you gave, which was very helpful.

Thanks you!

[warissem]

Hi pockets

Today while looking to my experience to answer your questions, it felt "harder" to see things clearly like I did yesterday...

Can you give an example ?

The only "me" having trouble is a convincing thought that sometimes prevents "me" from being fully "convinced".

This answer does not come from direct experience. Do you see it as a thought ?

Even though conceptually I "understand" that there is only seeing... after SEEING that in direct experience, a conceptual understanding feels just like thoughts that are unsatisfactory (which is also a thought). I can see the difference very clearly between thoughts and seeing this directly now.

Good. What is this "I" seeing clearly ? Look.

Can you please clarify this question? What do you mean by other places? This "knowing principle" feels like the only place that there is.

Good observation.

I can feel that there is no "me" that HAS thoughts. There are thoughts and there are feelings that are being experienced.

Is it a feeling or a seeing ?

I can see that there is no witness outside or within this "knowing principle". The only witness is within the content of a thought, which doesn't "belong" to anything/anyone.

Yes, you are close.

Warissem

[pockets]

Hi Warissem,

Today while looking to my experience to answer your questions, it felt "harder" to see things clearly like I did yesterday...

Can you give an example ?

It felt like it was harder to "look past" the content of thoughts and recognize direct experience in the same way I had before. I knew what I was "looking for", but I just couldn't get out of loops of thought content.

Side note, but today I also noticed that sometimes I will be looking, and I will be convinced that "I" am seeing clearly my direct experience, then there will be a thought that notice all of the subtle labels/thoughts/opinions/reactions that are superimposed on my experiences, then a thought about that thought, etc. They feel so subtle and pervasive, but it is easier to notice them.

The only "me" having trouble is a convincing thought that sometimes prevents "me" from being fully "convinced".

This answer does not come from direct experience. Do you see it as a thought ?

I see it as a thought, yes, but not by default. Once I recognize it as thought, and there is no "me", there is just the thought.

Good. What is this "I" seeing clearly ? Look.

The "I" is just the seeing, the experience happening itself.

I can feel that there is no "me" that HAS thoughts. There are thoughts and there are feelings that are being experienced.

Is it a feeling or a seeing ?

These words feel very similar when describing what is being experienced, what is the difference? It is not a thought/feeling/emotion in the way that those are "felt", but it is not "seeing" in the way that I see the sky.

Thank you,

[warissem]

Hi pockets

It felt like it was harder to "look past" the content of thoughts and recognize direct experience in the same way I had before. I knew what I was "looking for", but I just couldn't get out of loops of thought content.

It is ordinary to have moments of confusion and moments of clarity. Just, look at thoughts when they arise and let them go.

Side note, but today I also noticed that sometimes I will be looking, and I will be convinced that "I" am seeing clearly my direct experience, then there will be a thought that notice all of the subtle labels/thoughts/opinions/reactions that are superimposed on my experiences, then a thought about that thought, etc. They feel so subtle and pervasive, but it is easier to notice them.

Take it easy and relax. Don’t be caught in thoughts.

I see it as a thought, yes, but not by default. Once I recognize it as thought, and there is no "me", there is just the thought.

Yes.

The "I" is just the seeing, the experience happening itself.

Good observation.

These words feel very similar when describing what is being experienced, what is the difference? It is not a thought/feeling/emotion in the way that those are "felt", but it is not "seeing" in the way that I see the sky.

I see what you mean : it is a knowing. A thought is known. Sometimes I use "seeing" instead of "knowing".


There is an exercise for you :

Find somewhere quiet to sit. Rest for a moment and listen to the sounds in the room where you are, or sounds from outside. Whatever it is, I'll just refer to it as 'what can be heard'.

1) In 'hearing' can anything be found other than 'what can be heard'?
2) Can what is doing the hearing be found? Or is there only 'what can be heard'?
3) An 'I'? a 'body'? a 'person'? a brain? a pair of ears? Can these be found doing the hearing? Or is there just 'what can be heard'?
What do you find?

Can an INHERENT HEARER be found? Would anything that is suggested as the hearer, be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

Warissem

[pockets]

Hello Warissem,

1) In 'hearing' can anything be found other than 'what can be heard'?

No, that is all there is. Sometimes hearing is "replaced" in experience by another sense, but within hearing, all there is is what is being heard.

2) Can what is doing the hearing be found? Or is there only 'what can be heard'?

There is nothing doing the hearing, the hearing is the entire experience.

3) An 'I'? a 'body'? a 'person'? a brain? a pair of ears? Can these be found doing the hearing? Or is there just 'what can be heard'?
What do you find?

There is truly only the hearing, the other things (all of them) belong to thoughts/get superimposed upon the sounds.

Can an INHERENT HEARER be found? Would anything that is suggested as the hearer, be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

No, there is only hearING, no hearER. There is no distinction between hearing/hearer, because the raw sound IS the experience, not a separate part of it.


A quick aside: Whenever there is this experience of "knowing" clearly, I can feel my mind making a mental image of what I visually picture this "knowing"/"awareness" as. But this also feels just like a thought/mental image. But it feels so real/unique, which brings me major confusion (which is an emotion that can also be observed).

Thanks for sharing this exercise,

[warissem]

Hi pockets

Good job.

A quick aside: Whenever there is this experience of "knowing" clearly, I can feel my mind making a mental image of what I visually picture this "knowing"/"awareness" as. But this also feels just like a thought/mental image. But it feels so real/unique, which brings me major confusion (which is an emotion that can also be observed).

Yes it is a thought. It is not your mind. What is a mind in your own words ?

What kind of emotion ? Is it an emotion of ease ? a beautiful one ?

Warissem

[pockets]

Hi Warissem,

Yes it is a thought. It is not your mind. What is a mind in your own words ?

A mind is a lens (for lack of a better term) in which experiences (sensations/thoughts/everything) are perceived... It is simultaneously the "thing" that enables experiences to exist and the experiences themselves. It is the foundation of "my" existence. It feels like the background/canvas of the entire experience that is happening.

What kind of emotion ? Is it an emotion of ease ? a beautiful one ?

The emotion I was referring to in the last post was one of confusion regarding the "distinction" between this knowing and contents of thought. This emotion comes when there is hazy seeing, and there is difficulty distinguishing between thoughts and experience. This is an especially bizarre feeling because I have /seen/ things to be a certain way, but then am unable to see it clearly consistently. Does this make sense?

In regards to the emotion surrounding this actual "knowing" feeling specifically, I wouldn't say "beautiful", because there is no awe/surprise/wonder involved... but I would say its very passive and easy, it just is what it is... but this is only when there is clear seeing.


I would also say that when there is knowing, it feels obvious, like "woah, it was here all along". But then when it "goes away", so to speak, it fees merely conceptual.

I hope this helps explain, Thank you