Take two!

[Bobf]

I'm tied up at a work retreat today. Will answer tomorrow Am. Bob

[Matthew]

That's fine
Looking forward to your answer!

[Bobf]

While attending only to sensations:

Can it be known how tall the body is?
Does it have a shape or a size?

Could pure sensation ever provide information like this?
Where only can this information come from?

Its funny - you've picked the exercise that I probably get most stuck on. Here are my answers:

-no, it can't be known how tall the body is
-no, it doesn't have a shape or size

Where I get stuck is on the "could pure sensation ever provide information like this?" question. The honest answer is that I don't know. For example, if my eyes are closed and someone pokes me in the head, it would be known that the head was poked. If that knowing isn't coming from the pure sensation, I'm not sure where its coming from...
Bob

[Matthew]

Ok then let us look where this information is coming from!

When you STOP right now and LOOK at your direct, actual, immediate experience. When you ignore all suggestions made by thought, what "more" there could be, is there more to experience than
seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, tactilce sensation and observed thought?

Thought might suggest that there is all sorts of other aspects to experience as "intuition", "love", "feeling" and what have you. But at the end of the day, in direct expererience, would it be more than a thought ABOUT "intuition", "love", "feeling" and so on?

Can you, in your direct experience, not by thinking about it but by looking at it, find something besides
seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, sensation and thought?

If so, what would that be?
And how exactly do you experience that?

[Bobf]

When you STOP right now and LOOK at your direct, actual, immediate experience. When you ignore all suggestions made by thought, what "more" there could be, is there more to experience than
seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, tactilce sensation and observed thought?

Only other thing I can find are non-tactile sensations - feelings like fear, tension, etc. (I realize those are just labels applied to these non-tactile sensations).

Thought might suggest that there is all sorts of other aspects to experience as "intuition", "love", "feeling" and what have you. But at the end of the day, in direct expererience, would it be more than a thought ABOUT "intuition", "love", "feeling" and so on?

Can you, in your direct experience, not by thinking about it but by looking at it, find something besides
seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, sensation and thought?

No, I can't find anything else. As I've mentioned, there is a sense of location (e.g. this sensation is in a different part of space that that sensation), but I suppose that's not a direct experience.

Bob

[Matthew]

Good. Good.


Is there really "fear"? Or are there thoughts about "fear"?

How do you know about a sense of location?
What tells a story about that?

[Bobf]

Is there really "fear"? Or are there thoughts about "fear"?

There are just sensations accompanied by thoughts. That's clear to me

How do you know about a sense of location?
What tells a story about that?

I just sat down, closed my eyes and, without focusing on thoughts, watched sensations arising. Its tricky because I find that sensations arise accompanied by a sense of location. I'm not sure what that "sense" is - perhaps its a very subtle thought ("that sensation was up here", "that sensation was down lower", etc.). Sometimes though, I just experienced sensation without any location.

Bob

[Matthew]

This was seen clearly! Very good looking.

I'm not sure what that "sense" is - perhaps its a very subtle thought

Thought can apparently arise in a broad bandwidth of subtlety. That's what needs to be not only understood, but SEEN.
There are "loud" thoughts like those, that are generally referred to as "voice in the head" or a catchy tune or a clear picture of something.
And then there is... well! Everything else aside from the seen, the heard, the smelled, the tasted and the sensed.
Can you follow?

You already saw that there is only seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, sensation and thought to experience.
If that is clear:
Look at the closest door around you and tell me:
What do you SEE when looking at the object? Is there more than the seen(colour) in the seen?
Where do you get information like "door", "brown", "open" and such from?

[Bobf]

Thought can apparently arise in a broad bandwidth of subtlety. That's what needs to be not only understood, but SEEN.
There are "loud" thoughts like those, that are generally referred to as "voice in the head" or a catchy tune or a clear picture of something.
And then there is... well! Everything else aside from the seen, the heard, the smelled, the tasted and the sensed.
Can you follow?

Yes.

You already saw that there is only seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, sensation and thought to experience.
If that is clear:
Look at the closest door around you and tell me:
What do you SEE when looking at the object? Is there more than the seen(colour) in the seen?
Where do you get information like "door", "brown", "open" and such from?

When I look at the door, what I see is just color. All the labels you mentioned ("door", etc.) are simply thoughts/memories. I see that clearly. I still get a little hung up on the spatial location business though. If you said to me "touch the door", I'd reach my hand forward, not behind me. The sense of location (the door is in front of me, not behind) doesn't seem like a thought, more like a conditioned sense. But I guess that this sense isn't direct experience...

By the way, I'm leaving for New York City in a couple of hours to celebrate my father's 96th birthday! I won't be able to post tomorrow (Saturday) - not sure about Sunday, but I'll try.

Bob

[Matthew]

I still get a little hung up on the spatial location business though.

It takes some continued looking for that to become experience. But it is not a necessity to "master" any of that.
Since also this is only a tool for us to see thought for what it is and how it appears.

If you said to me "touch the door", I'd reach my hand forward, not behind me.

I'm not saying, the door is not there. It is only about seeing clearly where that information is coming from.
From pure seeing? Or from thought accompanying the seeing?

When you STOP right now and LOOK at your direct, actual, immediate experience. When you ignore all suggestions made by thought, what "more" there could be, is there more to experience than
seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, tactilce sensation and observed thought?

Only other thing I can find are non-tactile sensations - feelings like fear, tension

So is there "fear"?
Or are there thoughts about fear?
What is the direct experience of "I have fear"?


Wow.. 96! Very best wishes and have a good time!
Looking forward to your reply!

[Bobf]

I'm back!

If you said to me "touch the door", I'd reach my hand forward, not behind me.
I'm not saying, the door is not there. It is only about seeing clearly where that information is coming from.
From pure seeing? Or from thought accompanying the seeing?

When I look at the door, I just see colors and shapes. I guess the idea that these colors/shapes are "in front of 'my' body" comes from experiences one has. In other words, "this is a door and its in front of me" doesn't come from pure seeing.

Only other thing I can find are non-tactile sensations - feelings like fear, tension
So is there "fear"?
Or are there thoughts about fear?
What is the direct experience of "I have fear"?

There are just physical sensations and thoughts. Fear is just a label.

By the way, your initial question to me "Can you drop ALL expectations" was very powerful. I definitely have the expectation that "something will happen" after which I will KNOW for certain that there is no self. When I first read your question, there was a moment of dropping all expectations - of just pure experiencing.

Bob

[Matthew]

So what happened then? What was disturbing the peace?
If you'd on the one hand look at this moment frame by frame and look at what's here now:
Did something not stay?
Or did something come back?

[Bobf]

So what happened then? What was disturbing the peace?
If you'd on the one hand look at this moment frame by frame and look at what's here now:
Did something not stay?
Or did something come back?

When you said that I should drop all expectations, there was a relaxing into the moment. A dropping of thought and a awareness of seeing, hearing, etc.

I don't remember what happened immediately afterwards, but probably some of train of thoughts arose and I got mesmerized by it.

Bob

[Matthew]

If you can utilise the power of dropping that baggage, we will use it!

Can you also drop right here and right now ALL ideas about what is true and what is not true?
All ideas about what you've learned in the past, that might be "right" or "wrong"?
It really doesn't matter if they are "right" or "wrong". They are just baggage in any case.

...there was a relaxing into the moment. A dropping of thought and a awareness of seeing, hearing, etc.

...but probably some of train of thoughts arose and I got mesmerized by it.

Has thought really the power to mesmerise anything?
Or is that also -again- just another thought story?

Is seeing and hearing really obstructed by thought, or isn't it happening in the same unobstructed way with thought appearing alongside it?
And isn't a thought about "I got mesmerised by it" just as clearly and unobstructedly known as any other thought or a thought about "no thought"?

[Bobf]

If you can utilise the power of dropping that baggage, we will use it!

Can you also drop right here and right now ALL ideas about what is true and what is not true?
All ideas about what you've learned in the past, that might be "right" or "wrong"?
It really doesn't matter if they are "right" or "wrong". They are just baggage in any case.

Yes, I can drop all these ideas and, for awhile, its a relief (I just did that). But then of course, after awhile they arose again.

...there was a relaxing into the moment. A dropping of thought and a awareness of seeing, hearing, etc.
...but probably some of train of thoughts arose and I got mesmerized by it.

Has thought really the power to mesmerise anything?
Or is that also -again- just another thought story?

There is no "one" who gets mesmerized. There is just focus on the thought story.

Is seeing and hearing really obstructed by thought, or isn't it happening in the same unobstructed way with thought appearing alongside it?

When there is focus on the thought story, there isn't much awareness of sights and sounds. But then, for example, if a loud sound arises, the focus shifts to the sound.

And isn't a thought about "I got mesmerised by it" just as clearly and unobstructedly known as any other thought or a thought about "no thought"?

After focus shifts away from the thought, there is awareness that it was just a thought. But while there's exclusive focus on a thought, there's not much awareness of anything else. Although there must be, otherwise I wouldn't see or hear anything that occurs!

Bob