the house of me

[blackh]

Hi Vikas,

Thanks! You're doing a great job of helping me figure out what questions to ask.

But the important question is, do you believe this "I am" feeling, or is it just an empty claim?

When I am really, really engaged, for example: thinking to solve a problem or immersed in music, etc … in those moments there is an ‘aliveness’. In those moments, I don’t say to myself “oh, look at the sound which this body is aware of as vibrations”; instead the thought is something like “OMG! This music makes me feel good.” I ‘feel’ that the sense of “I” is strong in these moments. This also applies to when I might be extremely worried or in a lot of pain.

Now, about this sense of "I"... Some while ago (13 June) you said this:

If I close my eyes the attention shifts to the sounds. I can hear the beeping of a truck backing up. I don’t see it but thoughts tell me that it is a truck. ...
In my house, I see things. Not sure about the exact mechanism but words/labels appear telling me what it is – chair, bed, table, etc. concepts like kitchen, bedroom.

When you hear and see things, you pretty much instantly know what they are. When you see a cup, the knowledge of what it is sticks to it like glue. Is this also true of body sensations?

There's a feeling of aliveness. Could it be that the mind instantly knows what that feeling is, without the slightest doubt? It's you! When you see a cup, do you doubt whether it's a cup or not? Of course not. You know it's a cup. When you feel that aliveness, do you doubt whether it's you or not? Of course it's you!

Could it be the same mechanism?

But the belief isn’t yet pervasive in every moment of my life (hope that makes sense); the “I am” feeling is strong in moments of extreme pleasure/pain/etc.

The body will always produce the same kinds of sensations as long as it's alive. But what is actually there? It takes a bit of perseverance with your looking. When that "I am" feeling comes up, have a good look at the sensation and the meaning that the mind gives to it, and don't let the meaning go unquestioned.

The experience of looking at a cup: colours + thought label "cup"
The experience of an "I am" feeling: sensation + (what?)

If I am supposed to make dinner tonight, then dinner will be ready. (there is a thought – “do this, don’t procrastinate, live up to your word”).

There are thoughts that I must make dinner, and at some point there are likely to be the actions of doing it. Is there a self involved somewhere in this?

When I ignore the “I am the seer” thought, then the only truth that remains is that there is an awareness of seeing. Nothing else is truly true. And still, there is a feeling that awareness has to have a house. I ‘feel’ that I am the most obvious choice.

I agree that it's the most obvious thing in the world that awareness has to have a house. But wouldn't it be really bizarre if it didn't have one?

Where in experience is the boundary between the inside where you are, and the outside where the world is?

Visually I am aware of where my body ends and where the world outside of the body is.

Say you're inside a house looking out the window. The outside is experienced as images of trees, lamp-posts, etc. Then there is glass, which we can say is an obvious boundary between the inside and the outside. The inside of a house is experienced as wallpaper, curtains and stuff like that. The stuff on the inside side of the glass is different in clear ways to the stuff outside.

It seems reasonable to draw a boundary of what "I" am inside of at the skin of the body. The outside of it is experienced visually as images of worldly objects.

How is the inside of the body experienced?

Greg Goode has something interesting to say about this in his books. He points out that today's ideas about human knowledge are based on ideas originally modelled on the theory of optics by influential thinkers in the 17th century. The camera obscura was especially popular at that time.

Does experience actually support the conceptualization "I am in here and the world is out there", or could it be that it's a culturally influenced analogy that only roughly fits the facts?


Steve

[shivite]

hi steve

When you hear and see things, you pretty much instantly know what they are. When you see a cup, the knowledge of what it is sticks to it like glue. Is this also true of body sensations?

Yes.

There's a feeling of aliveness. Could it be that the mind instantly knows what that feeling is, without the slightest doubt? It's you! When you see a cup, do you doubt whether it's a cup or not? Of course not. You know it's a cup. When you feel that aliveness, do you doubt whether it's you or not? Of course it's you!
Could it be the same mechanism?

Yes

When that "I am" feeling comes up, have a good look at the sensation and the meaning that the mind gives to it, and don't let the meaning go unquestioned.
The experience of looking at a cup: colours + thought label "cup"
The experience of an "I am" feeling: sensation + (what?)

The experience of an "I am" feeling: sensation + thought label “I am”
Let’s take the ‘good music is playing’ experience. I feel there is a desire to ‘own’ the bliss. To personalize it with ‘I am’.

There are thoughts that I must make dinner, and at some point there are likely to be the actions of doing it. Is there a self involved somewhere in this?

But it is undeniable that the thought was invoked at approximately the right time. (it is like a reminder that pops up 15 minutes prior to a meeting).

It definitely feels like the body/mind has a mechanism for invoking thoughts at a certain time. Maybe the mechanism is ‘desire’ rooted in ‘beliefs’.

I don’t think I have control over ‘desires’ and neither is there a self in the ‘desire’; in this way, ‘desire’ seems pretty much like ‘pattern of reactions’.

Am I on the right track?

I agree that it's the most obvious thing in the world that awareness has to have a house. But wouldn't it be really bizarre if it didn't have one?

I think we need to spend time on ‘awareness’ next, if you agree.

How is the inside of the body experienced?

Sensations – like breathing, headache, cramps.

Does experience actually support the conceptualization "I am in here and the world is out there", or could it be that it's a culturally influenced analogy that only roughly fits the facts?

When I look at something all I know for a fact is the ‘experience’ in the present moment. That there is an awareness of an object. Such as a tree. When I touch the tree, all I know for a fact is that there is sensation on the skin. The apparent thought that the tree is 2 feet away from me is my perception of the shadows/depth/light/etc. when I go away for a week, and come back – the tree might have died or grown a foot. The mind constructs stories as to why the tree might have died or grown. In other words, mind correlates memories that span time and reaches a conclusion. However, in the in present moment looking at the tree all we know for a fact that there is an awareness of the tree.

I can wrap my head around this concept.

But despite the experiential evidence of the present moment, my mind is creating stories that correlate events/memories that span time.

[blackh]

Hi there Vikas,

But it is undeniable that the thought was invoked at approximately the right time. (it is like a reminder that pops up 15 minutes prior to a meeting).

It definitely feels like the body/mind has a mechanism for invoking thoughts at a certain time. Maybe the mechanism is ‘desire’ rooted in ‘beliefs’.

I don’t think I have control over ‘desires’ and neither is there a self in the ‘desire’; in this way, ‘desire’ seems pretty much like ‘pattern of reactions’.

Am I on the right track?

The body/mind has amazing, sophisticated capabilities. No doubt about that. If you analyze it you can identify all sorts of influences, with belief being an important one. My body often wakes up 5 minutes before the alarm goes off in the morning. Sometimes 1 minute. How does it do that? I can't be doing it because I am asleep.

Yes, definitely on the right track. BUT - for our purposes the details of how it works aren't that important, except as it affects telling the difference between fact and fiction, and finding that elusive "I".

How is the inside of the body experienced?
Sensations – like breathing, headache, cramps.

No me seen as yet, but there's a feeling that there must be a me inside somewhere.

I agree that it's the most obvious thing in the world that awareness has to have a house. But wouldn't it be really bizarre if it didn't have one?

I think we need to spend time on ‘awareness’ next, if you agree.

No worries. Just to make sure the language is clear, I'm using the word "awareness" in its most limited sense of just the faculty of being aware of whatever the attention is pointing at. Not including the attention itself or whatever controls it. You said in your original comment on this topic...

When I ignore the “I am the seer” thought, then the only truth that remains is that there is an awareness of seeing. Nothing else is truly true. And still, there is a feeling that awareness has to have a house. I ‘feel’ that I am the most obvious choice.

Maybe you've got it but you haven't got that you've got it. If there's an awareness of seeing, and awareness of a thought saying "I am the seer", then doesn't that mean that there is only awareness of seeing + awareness of thought, and nothing else? Or is there something else there?

However, in the in present moment looking at the tree all we know for a fact that there is an awareness of the tree.

I can wrap my head around this concept.

But despite the experiential evidence of the present moment, my mind is creating stories that correlate events/memories that span time.

Great! You're onto it. The past exists only in the form of a thought.

So does a self exist anywhere outside of thought? What actually is thought? What's the nature of it? What are its capabilities? Can a thought think?


Steve

[shivite]

hi steve

The past exists only in the form of a thought.

I get that. In the present moment there is only a thought of the memory. I am aware of the leftovers from the dinner last night, but in the present moment there is only a thought that the dinner was made. I have memories of writing to you last night and in this moment I am aware of 'some words on a laptop screen' but in the present moment there is only a thought/story justifying the words on the laptop.

If there's an awareness of seeing, and awareness of a thought saying "I am the seer", then doesn't that mean that there is only awareness of seeing + awareness of thought, and nothing else? Or is there something else there?

There is nothing else but awareness.

Dissected to a minute point in time, the ‘moment’, there is only awareness. So it follows that, over a span of time, there is only awareness. The rest is thoughts/stories.

So why stop at saying that ‘self’ doesn’t exist outside of thought. One can easily conclude that nothing exists outside of thought. Time doesn’t exist outside of thought. There is only awareness, ever.

So does a self exist anywhere outside of thought?

No

What actually is thought? What's the nature of it? What are its capabilities? Can a thought think?

need some more time with this.

[blackh]

Hi Vikas,

So why stop at saying that ‘self’ doesn’t exist outside of thought. One can easily conclude that nothing exists outside of thought. Time doesn’t exist outside of thought. There is only awareness, ever.

Well, sight and the other senses exist outside of thought (depending somewhat on how you define things). But certainly nothing can be proven to exist (or not to exist) outside experience/awareness (which are the same thing).

Experience has a certain structure and this allows thoughts to make some predictions about it. That's all. This doesn't mean we know the truth about experience.

So does a self exist anywhere outside of thought?

No

Then the obstacles to the gate have been removed. Tell me if anything is not clear or not making sense.

One thing I want you to notice is how simple this is. Only the obstacles to the gate are complex. It's almost too simple for the mind. You could take another look at the Bahiya Sutta - it contains everything you need to know.

I'll wait for your responses to the last question.


Steve

[shivite]

hi Steve

thanks for bringing me this far; much appreciated.

What actually is thought?

Thought is a sensation

What's the nature of it?

It appears from nowhere. It dissolves into nothing. It exists only in awareness.

What are its capabilities?

It claims responsibility for actions. It creates stories from memories. It creates the notion of “self”

Can a thought think?

no

One thing I want you to notice is how simple this is.

Yes – totally. When I looked at things from the point of view of a single moment then things started to get clearer.

Tell me if anything is not clear or not making sense.

Maybe. this is not a doubt about the self but I think the ‘faculty of being aware’ and its home is still an unresolved question. Last time you said “wouldn’t it be bizarre if it didn’t have one”. perhaps this is something i can read about, so pointers would be great ...

[blackh]

Hi Vikas,

Maybe. this is not a doubt about the self but I think the ‘faculty of being aware’ and its home is still an unresolved question. Last time you said “wouldn’t it be bizarre if it didn’t have one”. perhaps this is something i can read about, so pointers would be great ...

Maybe being cryptic wasn't the right thing to do there. I can't think of anywhere specific you can read about this. But let's get this resolved. First, here are the important bits of what we said about it:

Now turn attention to the seer/whatever is experiencing. What do you find there? Is there a "I" there, or any evidence or sign from which you can infer the existence of a hidden "I"?

The observer seems detached from the experience. No “I” to be found.

Didn't you tell me you looked at the seer and didn't find anything?

When I ignore the “I am the seer” thought, then the only truth that remains is that there is an awareness of seeing.

Is there the thought, and something else observing the thought?

All I can say is that there is an awareness of the thought or the object that is being seen.

Here are some points to summarize what awareness is:

• When you look for the subject, you don't see it.
• There is no subject. The feeling of being a subject of experience is part of experience (body sensations + thoughts).
• Awareness doesn't exist independently of what it's aware of (experience).
• Experience doesn't exist independently of awareness of it.
• Awareness = awareness of experience = experience.

"In the seen, only the seen" as the Bahiya Sutta puts it, but it might be more accurate to say "in the seeing, only the seeing".

Is that making sense? Does it ring true/fit the facts?


Steve

[blackh]

Vikas,

Actually, I remembered where you can read about it! Here:

http://liberationunleashed.com/what-is-awareness/


Steve

[shivite]

yes, Steve. what you have summarized rings true* ... my mind was clouded by various videos of 'awareness' that made it out to be a mysterious thing.

just one question, last one i think. (this is not about finding the self, etc)

--> *Awareness doesn't exist independently of what it's aware of (experience).
the experience of 'passage of time' seems very real. . I understand that the past is a memory/thought. there is no experience of sleeping for 8 hours, yet there is an knowledge that i slept for 8 hours. this knowledge is only a thought.

does time exist outside the experience of the present moment?
is 'awareness of time', an inherent function of the body (you said you get up 1 minute before the alarm)

sorry, I am engineer. I need to rip the machine apart and build it back up :)

[blackh]

Vikas,

I don't know the answer to those questions, and we don't really need them for what we're doing here. There'll be plenty of opportunity to look into this later.

It seems you pretty much get everything, at least intellectually. Do you feel any different to how you did when we started the dialogue?

Now we need to work on letting it filter down. This happen by itself in its own way, and the only thing you can do is to persistently look in your daily life. There are two aims here: 1. To see if you can see a self, and 2. The self illusion tends to persuade a person to avoid looking at reality, so now you need to look at it as much as you can. It's really easy, because everything you look at is reality. Even being lost in thought is the reality of being lost in thought, but you need to be aware that this is what's happened (sometimes you realize afterwards). Look at life whenever you remember to and resist the desire to analyze and understand, because what you are looking at can't be understood.

It’s good idea to get outside into nature at this point. Watch trees, animals, babies, other people. See how everything moves, wiggles, trees, grass, animals, birds, humans, thoughts, feelings, the body that is here now. Notice that thoughts are arising dependent of what is being noticed, what is being experienced.

Notice life, aliveness and how everything is happening effortlessly. Turn the focus outside. Notice how everything simply is. perceiving is happening. It's here, now, alive.

See how seeing just happens. There is no one behind the eyes, no watcher, no observer, only watching, observing happening in the present moment. No agent that switches seeing on and off at will. Mind is doing it's usual business of labeling experience and it is also just happening by itself without an effort.


Steve

[shivite]

Do you feel any different to how you did when we started the dialogue?

The most obvious change is that I can see the world as a sequence of 2D images. A new frame follows the previous one. A few days back I had commented that my nose had blended into the tree. Now, I can distinctly say that I am in these frames as a participant and not as a distinct observer. Every moment is a snapshot and I am in it.
When I hear things, it is as if the distinction between the my ear and the source of the sound does not exist anymore. The ear that was firmly affixed on my body now seems to be floating in space.

More comments.

I looked up goode when you mentioned him. (this is the link: http://www.nonduality.com/goode.htm)
Here he describes his experience as
“It didn't come as a conceptual statement like "It is ABC." Rather, it came by way of the world and the body imploding into a brilliant light, and the willing, phenomenal self thinning out, disappearing in a blaze of the same light. No separation was experienced; no time or space was experienced, yet I knew myself as the seeing itself. All "willings," "desirings," "thoughts" and other mentations were deeply experienced as spontaneous arisings in awareness, happening around no fixed point or location.”

I experienced nothing close to what he is describing. I am not disappointed. Just that in my experience, there was no imploding into a brilliant light, etc.

I re-read the bahiya. First it says to train your mind. Which is exactly what you are asking me to do in the last comment (lifting filters, etc).
The last sentence is: “this alone is the end of suffering”. In think, inquisitiveness is a form of suffering as well. But I can honestly say that I still have more questions; but I like the questions and they are pushing me on; I don’t think I am suffering as a result of the questions. i don't know for sure.

LU’s website advice's that ‘thinking’ ain’t going to get you there. In this particular quest, I feel like my mind has helped but also that I am a victim of my mind. Thinking gets in the way of feeling. But I know no other way. Maybe the ‘implosion of brilliant light’ or ‘feeling it in the bones’ is a romanticized notion; maybe the path forward for me is to persevere, like you said, to see the world thru this lens. Rest will follow.

I definitely have dropped the beliefs of: ‘thoughts are real’, that there is free will, that there is an controlling I’; which is a huge step forward. I thought i could introspect; but now examination can be taken to a new level, to peel multiple layers. i am much appreciative of having been thru the process of examination itself.

I truly truly appreciate your guidance, patience, perseverance. you are contributing to making this world a better place, one person at a time. If there is anything I can do for you, please let me know. I mean it.

I appreciate the LU process. No matter what individuals get out of it, one thing for certain; having been thru this process can only create good citizens of this global world.

[blackh]

Hi Vikas,

Greg Goode is crapping all over my hard work of carefully managing expectations so that a subtle shift won't be missed. :) From now on he will be known as Greg Bad. The only brilliant light I got was when I stumbled into the bathroom at 4 AM. Seriously, though, Greg Goode's work is highly recommended.

We are looking for some kind of experiential confirmation and it is almost always subtle. Exceptions to this are quite rare. The form it takes varies wildly from one person to another. Experiential confirmation is sort of necessary, but it's very important to understand that it's not the actual aim. Your experience will change like the wind and can't be relied upon to tell you whether you have "got it" or not. The real and longer-term aim is a deepening certainty that there is no separate self estranged from the world. This will develop over time as your experiences slowly dispel the doubt.

The most obvious change is that I can see the world as a sequence of 2D images. A new frame follows the previous one. A few days back I had commented that my nose had blended into the tree. Now, I can distinctly say that I am in these frames as a participant and not as a distinct observer. Every moment is a snapshot and I am in it.
When I hear things, it is as if the distinction between the my ear and the source of the sound does not exist anymore. The ear that was firmly affixed on my body now seems to be floating in space.

What you say sounds great. If you ignore what Greg Goode says, does it feel like things are shifting? You will need some patience and perseverance at this point. I don't want to say too much about what specifically to expect, but keep relaxing into it and let's see what happens over the next days.

In think, inquisitiveness is a form of suffering as well.

I'm happy to answer questions that pertain to doubts or confusions, but now isn't the time to get too intellectual about it.

Suffering is caused by a seeking impulse that comes from a belief that there is something missing in the present moment. This seeking impulse manifests in many different ways: consumerism, overeating, obsessively seeking knowledge, self esteem issues, unhealthy relationship patterns, ... the list is practically endless. If inquisitiveness (or any behaviour whatsoever) is driven by a feeling of lack, then it will cause suffering, but if it's driven by a joyful curiosity, then it won't. The important point is whether it's coming from an emotional hole or an emotional self-sufficiency.

A dropping away of this seeking dynamic is a major sign that you have gone through the gate, however, it can take time. The reason is that the ego structure still remains even when the belief in self is seen through. Those parts of the ego structure that are based on the self idea ultimately can't stand, but it takes a while for to crumble. Seeking behaviours can continue after the gate for this reason.

One thing you definitely can't expect is for getting lost in thoughts to stop.

LU’s website advice's that ‘thinking’ ain’t going to get you there. In this particular quest, I feel like my mind has helped but also that I am a victim of my mind. Thinking gets in the way of feeling.

There is nothing at all wrong with thinking and trying to understand. However, it won't get you there. If you do it 100% of the time, then you have 0% probability of success. You have to look and keep on looking.

I definitely have dropped the beliefs of: ‘thoughts are real’, that there is free will, that there is an controlling I’; which is a huge step forward. I thought i could introspect; but now examination can be taken to a new level, to peel multiple layers. i am much appreciative of having been thru the process of examination itself.

That's great, because dropping those beliefs with stop your looking being clouded. All we are looking for is for these "un-beliefs" to percolate down into a deeper level. Yes, conditioning is structured in layers, but the so-called "gate" doesn't require you to remove them all. What it does is removes something from the core of it that acts as the "glue" that holds it all together. Most of the effects of this are long-term and not immediately obvious. This unravelling process continues over years after the gate.

If there is anything I can do for you, please let me know. I mean it.

The best thing you can do is - if the desire should take you - to pay it forward.


Steve

[blackh]

Vikas,

Every moment is a snapshot and I am in it.

I just need to pounce on this one and make sure you look at what this "me" is. It's fine to have a feeling of there being a me (and this will keep happening), as long as you don't believe it's really a me.


Steve

[shivite]

hi Steve

--> Every moment is a snapshot and I am in it.
it was my way of saying that I am not observing the snapshot. in other words, there is an awareness of seeing and the seeing includes everything (including this form/body). i understand that recognizing shapes/objects in the seeing is a thought. that thought did exist. can't deny it. but for sure, i don't identify as the observer of the snapshot. that has subsided.

[shivite]

hi steve

something interesting happened. I am preparing for a 4 day business trip and was packing my clothes. I picked out my best shirts, etc because "I" wanted to look good. Not in that specific moment but 5 minutes later i realized that "I want to look good" was a thought.

I am off for 4 days; answers might be sporadic. but this might be a good opportunity observe myself, the feeling of I, in the midst of meetings, discussions, dinners, etc.

I will write when i can while on the road.