me, myself & I

[Florisness]

Hi Nil,

Good to see you on this!:)

Identifying myself with arising thoughts is indeed another thought... that I'm still identifying with... How do I get out of this vicious circle?! Was there a vicious circle to begin with? ...

Could it be that there never has been a you? That would mean that everything has always happened on its own without a you/self doing anything, without a you that could be anything, just thoughts arising stating 'I am this, I am that'. How would it look like if everything happens on its own? Wouldn't it look exactly like.. this?

I'm not even sure anymore why I came to liberation unleashed in the first place. It seems that "I" isn't even sure why he does things. Looking back at my opening post, I wrote "I don't want to be convinced that there is no "I", I want to see it for a fact, an irrefutable one." Still not there yet. But then, how can "I" be convinced of anything if "I" doesn't exist?!

How will you see that there is no you? Obviously you can't see a no-you, but you can see where the I (as heard from all the stories) should be, but isn't and realize there isn't any self existing. Take a look, there is no you, no self.. is it true? And if you can't find it but still believe it's somewhere, then where? Could you point to it?

In other news, a funny thing happened to me earlier. I was watching that dude's video and the way the scene was lit made one side of his face brighter than the rest, almost white. At some point, I for some reason registered that white area as paint, as if this dude's face was painted on his side. And then, that white spot looked to me like a white form moving as the guy was talking. Pretty weird and probably irrelevant, but I thought I would share my story.

Sounds cool:D

Cheers,
Floris

[o_nil]

Hello Floris,

Could it be that there never has been a you? That would mean that everything has always happened on its own without a you/self doing anything, without a you that could be anything, just thoughts arising stating 'I am this, I am that'. How would it look like if everything happens on its own? Wouldn't it look exactly like.. this?

I'm open to the fact that there may be no me. To some extent it makes sense. But again making sense out of something is just a thought. Speaking of "I am this, I am that", a recurrent thought occurred to me earlier saying "I am a bundle of memories". It reminds me of when I was in high school and had those existential crises. I would think, "what's the point in all this, I'm going to die some day anyway". "I" didn't like the idea. I suspect I still don't like that idea but it doesn't show that much. Anyway, I had come to the conclusion that "I was just a collection of memories". There was still an "I" then though.
If everything happens on its own, there is an illusion that it doesn't, at least when it comes to "my" actions. And I realize that an illusion is another sensation in itself.
But I agree that if everything does happen on its own, everything would still look like the same!

How will you see that there is no you? Obviously you can't see a no-you, but you can see where the I (as heard from all the stories) should be, but isn't and realize there isn't any self existing. Take a look, there is no you, no self.. is it true? And if you can't find it but still believe it's somewhere, then where? Could you point to it?

Like you said, obviously "I" can't see no-"I" if it's not there in the first place. The problem I face here is that if I'm not able to find something, it doesn't necessarily means it doesn't exist, merely that it may just be out of my reach.
I was about to give an example now, but I realized it sounded wrong: "I can't find [insert an item], because I'm not with its presence at the moment. But if I go [insert a place where you can find previously picked item, I'll find it".
The thing is, *right now*, it ain't here. Maybe it'll appear in a second, a minute, a day... but maybe not. Can't be sure. Only a thought says "Oh yeah, a toothbrush, I can get one at the store".
Does that make any sense?
Oh right "making sense out of things"...

Thanks for the enjoying conversation (although "I" "still" "hope to" "figure this thing out" "eventually")
Nil

[Florisness]

Hello Nil,

Speaking of "I am this, I am that", a recurrent thought occurred to me earlier saying "I am a bundle of memories".

Yes that's good. Although it's important to note that 'illusory self = bundel of memories', and not a real self.

If everything happens on its own, there is an illusion that it doesn't, at least when it comes to "my" actions. And I realize that an illusion is another sensation in itself.

Yes let's check this out further.

The thing is, *right now*, it ain't here. Maybe it'll appear in a second, a minute, a day... but maybe not. Can't be sure. Only a thought says "Oh yeah, a toothbrush, I can get one at the store".
Does that make any sense?
Oh right "making sense out of things"...

So what is it that you don't find now, but could find later? Would it be something other than thoughts, sights, sensations or sounds?
Something to note is that, in any way no controller or doer is actually in our experience right? So even if it would exist somewhere else, it wouldn't actually be a 'you' (as thought it was) anyway, is that right? Even if it would be somewhere else, wouldn't there still be no control (for you)? Because that you, was believed to be here. I'm not trying to make you believe something, just trying to open up some more space:)

So perhaps it would be a good idea to hold the question 'is there something controlling what is happening?' in mind as you go throughout your day. There is obviously not something in a tree that is controlling it's growth from seed to tree, so really ponder the question in your activities 'Is there something exerting control, or doing things, or does it happen on it's own' (or whatever feels right for you)

Now please take a seat and focus on your thoughts.
Does there seem to be a controller behind it? Can thinking be stopped? Can a range of thoughts be picked? Is it known what thought will show up before it shows up?

You can do the same with attention. Find out if there is a controller behind it, or does it move on its own?

Yes thank you too very much, you ask great questions and I love writing you:) I'm always a bit reluctant to tell that though since it might interfere in the process (but hell I don't know if that's true..)

Floris

[o_nil]

Hey there,

it's important to note that 'illusory self = bundel of memories', and not a real self.

I can see that that's what defines my illusory self, but what about the real self. Is there such a thing as a self? More specifically, what's a self without an I?
There's a scene in the movie called "Anger Management" I want to share because it kinda reflects the kind of situation I am in. So in that scene, there is that guy who goes to an anger management therapy group and the shrink asks him "Tell us who you are" and the guys goes "My name is Dave, I'm a blah blah" and the shrink interrupts him and say "No, no, I'm not asking what you do for a living, or what your hobbies are, I'm simply asking who you are". Then Dave comes up empty and gets angry because of it. Now, I don't feel angry when I reach that particular point. Instead I might have more of kind of resistance or fear... of the idea that there is no "I" controlling anything. Still very fuzzy.
Anyway, if you feel inclined to, you can watch that scene at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hE17a_N9WA#t=04m19s

So what is it that you don't find now, but could find later? Would it be something other than thoughts, sights, sensations or sounds?

I can't think of anything else than thoughts and senses. Even logic says so.

Something to note is that, in any way no controller or doer is actually in our experience right?

Except for that "I" illusion, that is correct. I don't see anything doing the snowing, it just happens. However, I still get the impression that I am deciding/doing stuff out of my own free will.

So even if it would exist somewhere else, it wouldn't actually be a 'you' (as thought it was) anyway, is that right? Even if it would be somewhere else, wouldn't there still be no control (for you)? Because that you, was believed to be here.

Agreed, even if a controller was there outside, it wouldn't be me in the sense that it would be separate from me. And what's left if there's no controller... mmmh nothing? Or yeah, you right, a belief. I'm okay with that. But I can see something blocking the road here: "old habits die hard" and boy is that "I" belief an old habit or what!

I'm not trying to make you believe something, just trying to open up some more space:)

And I am grateful for that. Like Jed McKenna put it: "Having the answer isn't enough. You have to do the math." And my mind (or whatever) doesn't like homework, but I know if I don't do it it will haunt me.

So perhaps it would be a good idea to hold the question 'is there something controlling what is happening?' in mind as you go throughout your day. There is obviously not something in a tree that is controlling it's growth from seed to tree, so really ponder the question in your activities 'Is there something exerting control, or doing things, or does it happen on it's own' (or whatever feels right for you)

Okay, this is tricky again. Holding the question "is there something controlling what's happening?" is very much like latching on a thought. The thought gets lost on its own. I can will it back but it will disappear again. What raises the question: how come I can't keep a thought if I'm in charge of them. I'll need to do this thing again 'cause I feel I haven't done it long enough.

Now please take a seat and focus on your thoughts.
Does there seem to be a controller behind it? Can thinking be stopped? Can a range of thoughts be picked? Is it known what thought will show up before it shows up?

There seem to be a controller, but that doesn't mean there is. "Seems to be" isn't "There is".
Thinking can't be stopped. If I try to stop thinking of something, that's another thought like "stop thinking, idiot!".
I was about to say that the type of thoughts that arise depend on my environment, but I recall sometimes having thoughts that were totally unrelated to my situation... or at least I couldn't perceive a relationship.
It looks like I have control of what I'm thinking but if I'm honest with myself, I know I have no control over what the next thought will be. I find that "I" likes to B.S. itself quite a lot sometimes. I know what you are going to say: But is it really there, that "I"?

I'm always a bit reluctant to tell that though since it might interfere in the process (but hell I don't know if that's true..)

I'll tell you what interferes in the process, that's the very thing I'm trying to see through: my imaginary "I". At one point yesterday, I figured, it can't be complicated, it's gotta be simple, there is no gate. "That which cannot be simpler" like J. McKenna said. And yet, my mind unloads a pile of the usual stuff: regrets from the past, anxiety about the future, worries about the present ("am I doing this right?"), fear of being nothing... all the goodies that make up the human drama. And I am a great expression of it :-P

Cheers!
Nil

[o_nil]

One more thing: about attention.
I had difficulties with defining attention but as I was watching ice thawing on trees, there was a piece of ice falling down and it caught my eye. Then there was thoughts appearing and I figured that that was attention. That fraction of a moment between something happening in my field of vision and the appearing of the thought making sense of it.

[Florisness]

Hello,

Then Dave comes up empty and gets angry because of it. Now, I don't feel angry when I reach that particular point. Instead I might have more of kind of resistance or fear... of the idea that there is no "I" controlling anything. Still very fuzzy.
Anyway, if you feel inclined to, you can watch that scene at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hE17a_N9WA#t=04m19s

Yes I see. It's like you are missing something obvious right? Sorry to hammer this thing to dead, but it's not about there you are missing something, it's that something is added. What am I, where am I? who am I? I can't find an answer, I don't know who I am, I cannot find me anywhere, what am I overlooking? hmm..

I can see that that's what defines my illusory self, but what about the real self. Is there such a thing as a self? More specifically, what's a self without an I?

Well most of this is based on 'what am I?' but there is nothing that an I can be, because it doesn't exist. Then there is just this.

Instead I might have more of kind of resistance or fear... of the idea that there is no "I" controlling anything. Still very fuzzy.

yes this is good, it's just some fear bubbling up, just be with it.

There seem to be a controller, but that doesn't mean there is. "Seems to be" isn't "There is".
Thinking can't be stopped. If I try to stop thinking of something, that's another thought like "stop thinking, idiot!".
I was about to say that the type of thoughts that arise depend on my environment, but I recall sometimes having thoughts that were totally unrelated to my situation... or at least I couldn't perceive a relationship.
It looks like I have control of what I'm thinking but if I'm honest with myself, I know I have no control over what the next thought will be. I find that "I" likes to B.S. itself quite a lot sometimes. I know what you are going to say: But is it really there, that "I"?

you say 'There seems to be a controller", but you also say that there is no control over what the next thought will be. Look around the room, to familiar objects, and notice the thoughts and stories that come up, is there anything/anyone making that happen? Does there seem to be a decision or decider involved in what thoughts will come up?

F

[o_nil]

Hey Floris,

It's like you are missing something obvious right?

Well yes, how come I can't see it if it's obvious?? I know, I know, "I" can't possibly see it, can it?

Sorry to hammer this thing to dead, but it's not about there you are missing something, it's that something is added. What am I, where am I? who am I? I can't find an answer, I don't know who I am, I cannot find me anywhere, what am I overlooking? hmm..

Fair point. Hmm indeed. But, albeit emerging from thoughts that I'm identifying with, I can find answers to those questions. I can see however that it's not tangible proof.
For example:
"What am I?": "I'm a person that... [insert ID card details here]"
Great, I have loads of documents stating who and what I am. But honestly, I'm relying only on two beliefs. First, that whatever comes to thought is correct. Second, I can back it up with things in the world I live: people (family, friends), mirror, ID card, etc... all will confirm what thought says.
The stories that thoughts make up make sense so I trust them. Granted, sometimes some thoughts really don't make sense...
Okay now what if I just stop believing in thoughts, then what? Then who/what would not believe in thought anymore? What's more that's a thought in itself!
Something occurred to me: is there a need for an "I" for believing? Maybe not. Just like sensations arise on their own, no need for an "I", huh?

Well most of this is based on 'what am I?' but there is nothing that an I can be, because it doesn't exist. Then there is just this.

"Just this" in my case includes an imaginary "I" that I take too seriously apparently!

Look around the room, to familiar objects, and notice the thoughts and stories that come up, is there anything/anyone making that happen? Does there seem to be a decision or decider involved in what thoughts will come up?

Nothing seems to make the thoughts happening. It just happens. As I was looking around the room, my eye caught a stuffed animal and then a thought appear: "That's a perfect example because that object has a story I can describe". But even if these kind of thoughts appear out of nowhere, I still have the illusion that "I" perceive them. Probably another thought, though. What's funny is after the fact, "I" will take credit for moving my gaze, choosing an object, etc... "I" will pretend to be a decider. Hmm again...

Cheers!
Nil

[Florisness]

Hi there,

Fair point. Hmm indeed. But, albeit emerging from thoughts that I'm identifying with, I can find answers to those questions. I can see however that it's not tangible proof.

That "I'm identifying with" ?

Repeat saying these following words one by one a bit: I, me, my, mine.
Do you feel the sensations in the chest or other area's? Can you see how a thought + sensation gives rise to the illusion of a separate self?

"What am I?": "I'm a person that... [insert ID card details here]"
Great, I have loads of documents stating who and what I am. But honestly, I'm relying only on two beliefs. First, that whatever comes to thought is correct. Second, I can back it up with things in the world I live: people (family, friends), mirror, ID card, etc... all will confirm what thought says.
The stories that thoughts make up make sense so I trust them. Granted, sometimes some thoughts really don't make sense...

Can you find even a person in experience?
Are these stories needed? Or could it be that these stories are only needed to be believed in order to validate a self?

Nothing seems to make the thoughts happening. It just happens. As I was looking around the room, my eye caught a stuffed animal and then a thought appear: "That's a perfect example because that object has a story I can describe". But even if these kind of thoughts appear out of nowhere, I still have the illusion that "I" perceive them. Probably another thought, though. What's funny is after the fact, "I" will take credit for moving my gaze, choosing an object, etc... "I" will pretend to be a decider. Hmm again...

Yes the illusion that there is something perceiving is more like another layer of illusion, for now it's good enough to see that no real I is doing such a thing.
And how about driving the car, is that also just happening?

F.

[o_nil]

Good evening!

Repeat saying these following words one by one a bit: I, me, my, mine.
Do you feel the sensations in the chest or other area's? Can you see how a thought + sensation gives rise to the illusion of a separate self?

I don't feel anything ostensible. It's quite faint and difficult to describe but simply put, whenever I refer to me or mine, there is memories appearing in thought and possibly a feeling. That could be nostalgia, anxiety, boredom and what have you.
I can see how that can generate a lot of stories. I mean all of this wouldn't arise if I wasn't without thinking about myself.

Can you find even a person in experience?

In direct experience, I'm beginning to wonder about others like "are they real or am I making them up?". I know that sounds retarded. Yet there is no person in experience but the appearance of a person in sight and the sound of a voice in hearing. And of course a whole lot of the usual crap: "his/her name's Blah, s/he is blah blah..." and to be complete: "I am that to him/her". Incredible how much is projected at the sight of someone.

Are these stories needed? Or could it be that these stories are only needed to be believed in order to validate a self?

Ultimately, no story needed. Nature could do all right without human drama. I remember you saying that nobody's changing a seed into a tree. It just happens. The tree doesn't carry a story, we create one. It just is.
So, yes, you are correct: stories validate a self when believed. And that belief is deeply entrenched. But drop it, what remains? Not much and certainly no "I". Unfortunately, the illusion's still here.

Yes the illusion that there is something perceiving is more like another layer of illusion, for now it's good enough to see that no real I is doing such a thing.
And how about driving the car, is that also just happening?

Like I said in my previous post, "I" will take credit for any of "my" action... except maybe during involuntary (unconscious) actions (e.g. reflexes). That said, what makes them different from other actions? In my experience, it seems to stem from the fact that whenever I do something consciously, a thought appears before the actual action, hence giving a sense of control. Interesting... if I could inhibit that sense, all of my actions would be involuntary and would probably yield the same outcome. Well, well, whaddya know!
About driving a car... I have to admit I've been doing this experience almost every day during my commute: I just drive and observe "my" driving. And sometimes it freaks me out a bit. I still have a sense of control, but if I try to let go a little, the driving is still just fine. I'm not saying I purposely stop driving. What I'm saying is that I try to let go of that sense of control. And sometimes some weird stuff happens like I would see other cars' taillights in the dark has being just spots of bright red without having a concept of car attached to them. And yet, driving is still happening, and safely at that.
And of course, I often get the moments of absence while driving, lost in thoughts. In the meantime driving keeps going on on its own, magically. And then a thought says "already almost there" and bam I'm back. Ain't that something.
That relative perception of time is interesting. Depending on what's going on in my head, time flows fast or slow. Yeah yeah, whose/what head? ;-) And better yet, what is time anyway?

Now my question is: who's doing this inquiry if not "I"?
Another one is: who wants to know?
Answer to both questions: nobody.
But "I" doesn't settle for that! As UG Krishnamurti nicely put it "The moment we pose that question to ourselves, we have created a problem."

Nil

[Florisness]

Good evening!

In direct experience, I'm beginning to wonder about others like "are they real or am I making them up?". I know that sounds retarded. Yet there is no person in experience but the appearance of a person in sight and the sound of a voice in hearing. And of course a whole lot of the usual crap: "his/her name's Blah, s/he is blah blah..." and to be complete: "I am that to him/her". Incredible how much is projected at the sight of someone.

If there is no you (which there isn't, sorry you), could there possibly be another? If we try to find the beach, we might first drive to "it", then we try to find the real core, the real deal, the beach itself. So we walk around on the beach, but hey, wait! We walk on the beach? *looking down*, hmm nope, just sand here. So what about that over there? Hmm no just sea there. So is there really a beach? Could we find a you if we would dissect that body?

Like I said in my previous post, "I" will take credit for any of "my" action... except maybe during involuntary (unconscious) actions (e.g. reflexes). That said, what makes them different from other actions? In my experience, it seems to stem from the fact that whenever I do something consciously, a thought appears before the actual action, hence giving a sense of control. Interesting... if I could inhibit that sense, all of my actions would be involuntary and would probably yield the same outcome. Well, well, whaddya know!

Actually if you would preserve all actions carefully, you would discover that a lot of thoughts come after an action is taken.

About driving a car... I have to admit I've been doing this experience almost every day during my commute: I just drive and observe "my" driving. And sometimes it freaks me out a bit. I still have a sense of control, but if I try to let go a little, the driving is still just fine. I'm not saying I purposely stop driving. What I'm saying is that I try to let go of that sense of control. And sometimes some weird stuff happens like I would see other cars' taillights in the dark has being just spots of bright red without having a concept of car attached to them. And yet, driving is still happening, and safely at that.
And of course, I often get the moments of absence while driving, lost in thoughts. In the meantime driving keeps going on on its own, magically. And then a thought says "already almost there" and bam I'm back. Ain't that something.
That relative perception of time is interesting. Depending on what's going on in my head, time flows fast or slow. Yeah yeah, whose/what head? ;-) And better yet, what is time anyway?

So why should these thoughts and the sense of control be given any credibility? You already say that driving just seems to happen, and if the thoughts that say 'I did that' also just happen, then what do we have? isn't it this simple? :)

Floris

[o_nil]

Hey Floris,

If there is no you (which there isn't, sorry you), could there possibly be another?

Had to smile at your "sorry you". And now I wonder who smiled.
If there is no me, could there be you? By induction, I suppose I could say no. Nobody's having a conversation, on either side.

If we try to find the beach, we might first drive to "it", then we try to find the real core, the real deal, the beach itself. So we walk around on the beach, but hey, wait! We walk on the beach? *looking down*, hmm nope, just sand here. So what about that over there? Hmm no just sea there. So is there really a beach?

I like that analogy. We could even go further with sand and sea. I'm looking for sand but all I find is yellow, whitish colors and probably some specific sensation when touching it. All of which is in thought, right now. Same thing for the sea. So in direct experience, senses+thought only...

Could we find a you if we would dissect that body?

The stories goes: "The 'I' has got to be in the brain". I bet neuroscientists found a region of the brain that would act as an "I" (say, mirror neurons for example). It's a pretty convincing story, I should say. But now, if I split that region in two, would there be two "I"s? Mmmh, too much thinking, eh?

Actually if you would preserve all actions carefully, you would discover that a lot of thoughts come after an action is taken.

Even if I observed that thoughts came after an action's been taken, that would be a thought telling "me" this, correct? It's confusing at moments when I try to observe thoughts: I can't tell which thoughts appeared because of the "looking" from the ones that would show up anyhow... Or maybe that doesn't really matter.

So why should these thoughts and the sense of control be given any credibility? You already say that driving just seems to happen, and if the thoughts that say 'I did that' also just happen, then what do we have? isn't it this simple? :)

Yes it's very simple: all things just happen. But in practice, if there is no "I" to make decisions, I don't get to choose and change my belief system in the "I". It has to happen spontaneously on its own. Right? So whatever I do, "I" will either drop, or it won't, but "I" can't make it happen. Am I missing something here? "Cosmic joke", maybe? "I" trying to see itself but can't because it ain't there?

This is confusing, but I'm very intrigued by all of this. It somehow makes sense to some extent, but I don't seem to register. Not giving up!

Cheers,
Nil

[Florisness]

Hi Nil,

I like that analogy. We could even go further with sand and sea. I'm looking for sand but all I find is yellow, whitish colors and probably some specific sensation when touching it. All of which is in thought, right now. Same thing for the sea. So in direct experience, senses+thought only...

yes, nice :)

The stories goes: "The 'I' has got to be in the brain". I bet neuroscientists found a region of the brain that would act as an "I" (say, mirror neurons for example). It's a pretty convincing story, I should say. But now, if I split that region in two, would there be two "I"s? Mmmh, too much thinking, eh?

Would these neurons do stuff, or would there be just what is happening. A neuron doesn't have knowledge about what is going on, how could it be in control? And if it's in the brain, would it be a separate self and have arms, legs, observe what is happening, etc? If a bear stood in front of you, fear, adrenaline, and tensing of muscles would occur, is there any decision made to brought that all up? Anything in control which could say 'nahh, not going to bring up the fear pack this time'?

Even if I observed that thoughts came after an action's been taken, that would be a thought telling "me" this, correct? It's confusing at moments when I try to observe thoughts: I can't tell which thoughts appeared because of the "looking" from the ones that would show up anyhow... Or maybe that doesn't really matter.

Ahh, is there a believed thought 'I am the observer' there? :) Try not to observe for a minute or two.

Yes it's very simple: all things just happen. But in practice, if there is no "I" to make decisions, I don't get to choose and change my belief system in the "I". It has to happen spontaneously on its own. Right? So whatever I do, "I" will either drop, or it won't, but "I" can't make it happen. Am I missing something here? "Cosmic joke", maybe? "I" trying to see itself but can't because it ain't there?

This is confusing, but I'm very intrigued by all of this. It somehow makes sense to some extent, but I don't seem to register. Not giving up!

Yes it's simple, when we see that language isn't true, we have to stop believing it. I cannot have a conversation with you without lying, only lies can be communicated :).
There is no you, so now "you" have to release the controller and let it all happen right? But of course this isn't true, there is no you who would sit in the background, and see the show plays out now, now that that "you" doesn't have to take control anymore. There never was a you in control, and no you who could not have control, nor release it.


Floris

[o_nil]

Good day!

Would these neurons do stuff, or would there be just what is happening. A neuron doesn't have knowledge about what is going on, how could it be in control? And if it's in the brain, would it be a separate self and have arms, legs, observe what is happening, etc?

All good points! Humans are quite an amazing piece of machinery :-)

If a bear stood in front of you, fear, adrenaline, and tensing of muscles would occur, is there any decision made to brought that all up? Anything in control which could say 'nahh, not going to bring up the fear pack this time'?

Okay, should I meet a bear in the woods a thought tells me that I indeed would "feel fear, adrenaline and would get the hell outta here... no wait, can't do that, it'll be chasing me..." etc...
That said, I can't really tell what I'd do. Imagining the situation and living the actual situation are two different things!

Ahh, is there a believed thought 'I am the observer' there? :) Try not to observe for a minute or two.

Who are you telling that to? Me? :-)
But yeah, there definitely must be an "I'm the observer" thought somewhere underneath. Can't say underneath what. Thoughts sometimes are clear, in particular during an inner monologue "oh, I should get inside, it's cold" "yeah, says who" "me?" "me who?" "well me!" and so on...
But at other times, there are no words but ideas, images and stuff. But I suspect all of them embed an "I'm the observer" thought.

Yes it's simple, when we see that language isn't true, we have to stop believing it. I cannot have a conversation with you without lying, only lies can be communicated :).
There is no you, so now "you" have to release the controller and let it all happen right? But of course this isn't true, there is no you who would sit in the background, and see the show plays out now, now that that "you" doesn't have to take control anymore. There never was a you in control, and no you who could not have control, nor release it.

Right. So technically, there is actually nothing to be done! There is no "I" and no control, so either the realization of no-I arises in experience, or it doesn't. Period! Correct? (Thoughts: "Searching validation here but hoping to be wrong in which case blah blah" ... "so much B.S.: all of it" ... "if I'm just a reactor to my environment, maybe if the environment pushes the right buttons?") ...

Oh well, cheers!
Nil

[Florisness]

Hello Nil,

Right. So technically, there is actually nothing to be done! There is no "I" and no control, so either the realization of no-I arises in experience, or it doesn't. Period! Correct? (Thoughts: "Searching validation here but hoping to be wrong in which case blah blah" ... "so much B.S.: all of it" ... "if I'm just a reactor to my environment, maybe if the environment pushes the right buttons?") ...

Yes and since you seem to be understanding that, that's already the understanding that there is no you/self/controller, right? No realization has to occur, in the way of a big aha moment as some people think.

In the end of the guiding we usually ask some final questions to see if you are clear and have any remaining identification or doubts, want to go for it?

Floris

[o_nil]

Hi Floris,

No realization has to occur, in the way of a big aha moment as some people think.

All of this is still a little fuzzy in my mind (so to speak), but certainly no aha moment. Expectations, right?

In the end of the guiding we usually ask some final questions to see if you are clear and have any remaining identification or doubts, want to go for it?

Can't tell if I'll pass the test because I feel there remain a lot of things to unfold, but sure, why not? You're the guide after all :-)

Thanks!
Nil