Could you guide me?

[Jack'n'theBox]

OK let's check back in on how things are just now. So I'll ask again, consider this:

There is no 'me' at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form and there never was.

Sit with this and tell me what comes up -- speak from experience (feelings/sensations/emotions) -- don't follow thoughts.

[nowitis]

Hi Mark, it's on the run. I'm starting to notice the gap between an action and an I-thought. I feel deeply touched and grateful - and kinda stunned.

And a thought: What if I'm BSing myself? And what would that thought refer to? Another thought. The thoughts are just happening by themselves, aren't they: birdsong, thoughts, sensation of legs on the chair.

[Jack'n'theBox]

Great Glenn, people spend their whole lives believing that they are this "I" narrator in the head. But all thoughts (I thoughts included) occur sponataneously, running on their own program. So if "me" is not in thoughts -- where is this "me" -- can you find it?

[nowitis]

I don't know if I'm going to be able to express this adequately. When I've had space this afternoon I've been looking to see if I can see 'the looker'. Of course, there's just the looking + the scratchy sensation of eyes + the thought "my eyes." All experiences. But the sense of identity with my eyes is strong, or, these seem like 'my' eyes, not just eyes.

For one thing I don't feel anybody else's eyes - then there's a kind of lockbox in my thoughts, as if this proves the existence of I - until I realize that 'I don't feel anybody else's eyes' is a thought. But I'm feeling a little crazy when I get to this sort of edge Mark. (And who would that I be? A thought. And crazy? Disoriented feeling in my eyes and head - and some kind of shadowy dread in my chest/solar plexus/belly.) At the same time I'm very well aware that the actual moments of experiencing freedom from I are not scary in the least, are quite profoundly spacious. So this might just be more head-froth.

At the same time there's an urge to press forward, to open more, to have more moments of the gap....but you already responded to that when you said I was like a kid disappointed that Santa Claus hadn't even the cookies left out for "him".

There is no 'me' at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form and there never was.

WTF? Consternation as a sensation in my head. Some sort of panicky feeling around the root of my tongue,. Sensation of compression in my belly.

[nowitis]

And in my heart, quiet of the truth.

[Jack'n'theBox]

But the sense of identity with my eyes is strong, or, these seem like 'my' eyes, not just eyes.

I know what you mean as I had the same issue with sight -- it seems that me (here) is looking at stuff (there) -- very polarised. I worked through it by thinking about the science of vision -- light reflects off surfaces and enters the eyes -- the light hits the retina and is relayed to the back of the brain where it is assembled into a picture -- but the picture is inside the brain (or inside consciousness) -- not outside at all. In fact because it takes time for light to travel and the information to be relayed by the brain -- what "I" "see" isn't even in real time -- there's a lag, a delay, it's a representation of the world not the world in itself. "Sight" is a coproduction between mind and world -- it is co-dependent. It's not like there's a mini-me in your head peering out the eyes like they are windows. "Sight" is a seamless experience, no looker, no object seen, it is "one thing" in consciousness. The same goes for all the other senses. This is what it means "in the seen just the seen" -- no looker, no object, just one seamless experience in awareness.

There is no 'me' at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form and there never was.

WTF? Consternation as a sensation in my head. Some sort of panicky feeling around the root of my tongue,. Sensation of compression in my belly.[/quote]

Remember there is no self anyway even now -- so what you are "losing" is a false idea about there being a self. Now does that sound so scary?

[Jack'n'theBox]

Hi Glenn, the belief in self certainly seems to be loosening up -- I recommend doing this simple exercise often over the next few days:

As you move around in your normal activities, check and see if you can find a self moving the body around.Walking, driving, typing, dressing yourself, eating, talking etc. Is there a separate "me" living your life that is behind these activities? Or are there just thoughts about everything, including a self, seeming to live your life? Big difference. Just look at the evidence. In your daily life, in all your actions, keep returning to this focus on the thoughts as you move around. Keep checking if there is something real, besides a thought saying so, that owns and directs the body.

[nowitis]

I will attend to this, thank you. It is not easy to do. As for who's doing this cutting-off-the-branch-on-which-standing-is-happening....see below, about the hall of mirrors.

And, I'm aware how often a (seemingly) less hidden part of I-thought operates: the thought "I'm going to write Mark about this" then the action. Similarly, "What shall I have for breakfast?" and memory supplies an item in the fridge, which is what gets eaten. These kinds of sequences seem confirmatory of the validity of the I thoughts, although when I begin to micro-inspect them 'I' feel like 'I'm' in some kind of hall of mirrors.

Also I appreciate your reflections about vision - I have puzzled that long and hard, knowing 'what I see' is nothing like it appears to be - just because the neural mechanism works entirely otherwise. I will attend more to that too.

[Jack'n'theBox]

And, I'm aware how often a (seemingly) less hidden part of I-thought operates: the thought "I'm going to write Mark about this" then the action. Similarly, "What shall I have for breakfast?" and memory supplies an item in the fridge, which is what gets eaten. These kinds of sequences seem confirmatory of the validity of the I thoughts, although when I begin to micro-inspect them 'I' feel like 'I'm' in some kind of hall of mirrors.

Can you discover a causal connection between thought and action? I lie in the bed in the morning and think "I must get up, I must get up" but the body doesn't move. Then, later, when I'm thinking about something else, the body just gets up. What about the times that the body performs complex tasks, like driving, where is the thought directing each movement then? Does action require thought? Does thought prompt action? If so what is the mechanism by which this happens? See if you can discern this in experience.

Also regarding memory -- look and see if you can discern a causal relation between thoughts? Can there be more than one thought in consciousness at the same time?

[Jack'n'theBox]

Hi Glenn in case the above recommendation to look at thought in general is too vague to get a handle on you can do this exercise specifically in relation to breakfast:

1 Take a few moments to remember as vividly as you can the experience of eating breakfast earlier in the day. It helps to be specific – remember the feelings of hunger and anticipation. Remember the flavors, textures, aromas, the feelings of hardness, softness, crispiness, crunchiness, moistness, dryness, spiciness, saltiness and sweetness of the food. If you haven’t washed the dishes yet, you may even look at the remnants of the food on the plate and cup and knife and fork. Can you feel the food in your stomach? These things may help make the memories more vivid.

2 Now check for a moment – there seems to be a series of “memory-thoughts” occurring right now in direct experience. These present memory-thoughts seem to be recalling or referring to “breakfast thoughts” which occurred earlier when you had breakfast and experienced the thoughts originally.

3 Ask yourself how reference can actually happen. In your direct experience, how does a present memory-thought actually refer to a breakfast-thought? What is the proof that the breakfast-thought actually occurred?

When the breakfast-thoughts arose, was there a memory-thought among them taking notes?

And now, while the memory-thoughts are arising, are there any original breakfast-thoughts present to serve as the referents?

[nowitis]

Mark, I've been doing two things since you posted these, for both of which thank you. One is watching to see if there's anything except I thought accompanying my actions. There it is again, the automaticity of 'my' actions. It's a little eerie to notice that the whole sense of I in action is actually I in thought, a kind of claiming-ownership parallel soundtrack. Apart from that there's just things happening. I can't see any me doing it - but that parallel thought track is habitually compelling. And each time there is another noticing there's an odd sort of discomforted, "geez, is that all?" experience.

The second thing I've been doing is reading and rereading your last posting about the memory thoughts and breakfast thoughts, and I don't really get it. On June 9 you wrote

And can you discern a connection between thoughts?

and I meant to ask you about that then, because I think this is the same thread. And I very much appreciate your labors in writing back and explicating what you were sharing but I wonder if that is another way to come at it so I might see more clearly what you're referring to?

[Jack'n'theBox]

"And can you discern a connection between thoughts?"

Hi Glenn, this is an important point that you need to check out in experience because it goes to the whole continuity of the 'self' thing that you seemed to point to in your post about memory. Go back to the exercise we started with where you are aware of the different expereinces all happening in awareness -- bodily sensation, sound, smell, taste, sight, ending with thought. Watch the thoughts appear and disappear -- can you apprehend any causal connection between these thoughts? i.e. thought A appears and disappears, thought B arises . . . are they connected and if so how?

[nowitis]

...it entirely consists of thoughts, doesn't it, this I? And what's more, the 'I' these thoughts refer to there ain't no such thing, despite all their apparent (when unexamined) veracity. Is this what you were getting at?

[Jack'n'theBox]

...it entirely consists of thoughts, doesn't it, this I? And what's more, the 'I' these thoughts refer to there ain't no such thing, despite all their apparent (when unexamined) veracity. Is this what you were getting at?

Yep!

‘There is no ‘me’ in any shape or form, in reality. There can be a thought-created ‘I’ in a story about ‘me’. But the thought-created ‘I’ doesn’t refer to anything at all. It’s just a thought.’

Have you SEEN this to be true or have you just got a conceptual understanding of what's going on here?

[nowitis]

Something transient and in between those two: a moment of noticing the I thought and recognizing it couldn't possibly encompass the infinity of experience in that moment. And then recognizing (conceptual understanding, maybe but proceeding directly from that initial seeing) that it's always like that, that I seems to encompass the moment but all it does is encompass a thought.

I doubt myself here Mark: the thought process as if I was really seeing I would be having some kind of profound understanding, and what's actually happening is a good deal more prosaic, and especially, momentary....and the fact that I say ''I doubt myself'' makes me wonder if I am actually standing on a branch while I saw it off....aaagh, the I who seeks to end I, oh dear.

How about I just go back to the exercise you suggested earlier today, get out of my end-gaining head.