Cutting through the paradox

[ossie123]

For there being no Ossie, she is just HILARIOUS. And you're right! You clearly have the theory and the words and some prior experience. Admittedly, that does get in the way. Nothing to be done about that.

Yes, it does get in the way.
In the interests of full disclosure this body thinks it is male. Interestingly when online many people think it expresses itself as a female. I did think it was funny that when you said my physical symptoms were hormonal - I thought that I’m glad I am not female or I would have been offended, luckily I am not so I wasn’t.

Let's make a bit of a distinction between what we call I/me/self and just Life life-ing or Awareness.
….

The point is:

Yes, there is some kind of awareness thingy, but does that mean that there is a "me/self/I?"

How about those edges of "I?" Find any, yet?

No. I think I just happens and I believe in I. The “I” you just mentioned is not I. This is again where words muddy the issues, everything is I so it is hard to make a distinction. I tend to use the word self to denote the I that I believe in. I believe in myself or more accurately my self believes in my self. I guess there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with that unless I believe myself is all there is or I think my self is controlling my self or anything unexplained is attributed to my self to build the illusion of my self being what I am.

I did have a bad dream last night where the entire suburb I worked in was burnt and when it died down I walked in the pitch black and was attacked. They do say this process is like lighting a fire under everything so maybe it was a good dream.

I will say this is more of what I think than SEE but I can’t find a self (where I used to think there was one that was controlling awareness) and I cannot find an edge to whatever it is you are calling “I” and is probably awareness, but that word has baggage for me because I thought awareness was my Self rather than my self but perhaps Self and self are both illusory. If there is no self why would there be a higher Self?

Remember, it is the relaxed looking that matters. Maybe it will help if you just act like you don't care.

… and wave my hands in the air.
Seriously, surrender is important but difficult. No it is difficult only because I say it is so I make it so. There is actually nothing to surrender to in reality so that itself is just a concept. Allowance is what is needed. Allowance is also relaxation because it is the end of struggle. Hey, I like that. I’ll work with it.

Kind of like in "Illusions," have you read it? When he is trying to learn to fly, it happens when he least expects it, but the attempts mattered.

I read it so long ago I forgot I even read it until I Googled it, let alone remembered the story.

I think of it like playing sport (or music but I am more sporty). You practice and practice and most times you put the practice in the game. When you play amazingly well you forget the practice and just play the game. When I did that I wasn’t thinking of the game but just let my body do what it was taught. Lewis Hamiltion in F1 just last weekend said “I don’t know where that came from” when he set the fastest lap in an inferior car, against all expectations and being slower the previous 2 days. Allowance!

It's tempting to give you another exercise. The thought arose that you must be tired of this one, but the next thought that arose suggested that being tired of it might actually help!

See, you are a sadist.

I'll post another soon and see what arises to do, ok?

Signed,
Stacy, your own personal Consciousness Sadist

Maybe another word for sadist is selfless.

Until I get your next torture (Oops - exercise) I will work on allowance.
Less thinking, more allowance.

[Anastacia42]

Hi Ossie!

Luckily, we both know gender is made up, too, so these online things happen. The only other "Ossie" I know is female. My name is also used for both genders. Also, being female-bodied, I tend to appreciate the reminder that some of my mood fluctuations may just be biological. Not everyone does. It depends on whether it is dismissive, "just hormones," or empathetic, "yeah, me, too - hormones."

perhaps Self and self are both illusory. If there is no self why would there be a higher Self?

Indeed, they are! As are: ego, subconscious, id, inner child, and any other bit of content. ALL are simply thought arising. "Nothing we see means anything. We have given everything we see all meaning it has for us." (ACIM)

I did have a bad dream last night where the entire suburb I worked in was burnt and when it died down I walked in the pitch black and was attacked. They do say this process is like lighting a fire under everything so maybe it was a good dream.

Dreams are equally meaningless. Once again - do they pass the criteria we've named for things that don't disappear when we look?

Can you see it? Hear it? Feel it? Touch it? Taste it? Smell it? with your 5 senses - or is it merely another form of thought arising with made-up content and more stories?

Check! LOOK! Don't take my word for ANYTHING.

Remember LOOKING at the socks for color? NOT just thinking about what color they are? Like that!

This (below) is just a thought arising now, not your present experience. You don't do yourself any favors by remembering other experiences to answer these questions.

From the SEEing last time... There is no time, no space, no thing.

Maybe another word for sadist is selfless.

Until I get your next torture (Oops - exercise) I will work on allowance.
Less thinking, more allowance.

Yeah, yeah. There is something to what you say. When we know there is no self, we can become a bit impersonal realizing that there is nothing to all these stories of suffering, but we also have a certain kind of compassion for others, too.

JUST LOOK

Be sure that you are not confusing a thought arising with its content. The thought just arises. That doesn't go away, but the content? POOF!

Okay, something new - a different angle (or torture, if you prefer :) ). Let’s look at the idea of time and then we will look at the idea of memory.

There is a general assumption that there is linear time that started (if started at all) somewhere very far in the past and advances to the distant future. The present moment (now) is considered to be a very small fragment of time, or an event that is moving forward on this linear time, coming from the past and advancing to the future. Right?

But is there an experience that the ’now’ is moving along the line of time?

Any experience of one ‘moment’ giving way to the next?

Any actual experience of one event following another?

How fast is the ‘present moment’ actually moving?

Just look at 'this moment', can you find a point where it began?

How long does the ‘now’ last?

Where does the ‘now’ start, and where does it end?

When does the ‘now’ exactly become the 'past'?

What is the ‘past’ in actual experience?

So is there actual experience of ‘time’ or thoughts about ‘time’?

Please answer each question that is highlighted in blue above - by LOOKING!

Not remembering, not reciting, not philosophizing. LOOK!

Much love,

[ossie123]

Hi,

Had a few days of travel so hard to get connected. Sorry. We are staying put for a week now. I was doing the exercise and not going any further after a while so thought I’d report back.

I’ve done it a couple of different ways and seem to come up with the same answer – nothing. I’m not sure if that is seeing nothing or missing what is there, or even imiagining what I think it should be, but here are my answers after doing the exercises both by tracing a thought back to the time it began and also trying to “sit” in time and watch it.

But is there an experience that the ’now’ is moving along the line of time?

No, no movement at all.

Any experience of one ‘moment’ giving way to the next?

There are not two moments that I can see.

Any actual experience of one event following another?

No, it is seamless not disjointed.

How fast is the ‘present moment’ actually moving?

Not moving at all.

Just look at 'this moment', can you find a point where it began?

No.

How long does the ‘now’ last?

Forever.

Where does the ‘now’ start, and where does it end?

No beginning and no end – it is timeless.

When does the ‘now’ exactly become the 'past'?

It doesn’t “become” the past. It is hard to explain. Maybe like space where here doesn’t become “left” unless I have a different perspective.

What is the ‘past’ in actual experience?

There is no actual experience of the past. (Maybe like there is no actual experience of left but only here. But that is philosophising so I didn’t say that.)

So is there actual experience of ‘time’ or thoughts about ‘time’?

I really have to answer no to this one. There is no actual experience (that I could find) of time. There are plenty of thoughts about it but I could not experience it directly.

Please answer each question that is highlighted in blue above - by LOOKING!

Not remembering, not reciting, not philosophizing. LOOK!

Oops, too late, lucky I didn’t say what I didn’t say.
I’ve answered as best as I could even when the answers didn’t seem right.

[Anastacia42]

Today got away from me. I reply tomorrow probably in the morning.

Thank you!

[Anastacia42]

Hi,

Better late than never. It's almost midnight here. So I promised you a memory exercise, and here it is.

Also, I want you to reread your own thread from beginning to end. And are you still reading Gateless Gatecrashers?

Memory Exercise

Almost everybody believes that a memory thought is referring to something that has happened. That a memory thought is a different thought than a non-memory thought.

Please don’t go to thought explanations, but just let a memory be there, and look at it. Look at what is actually going on and not what thoughts say - but what actually is.

What is memory exactly?
What is the memory ‘made of’?
WHEN does the memory appear?

What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘memory’ thought? How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened?

Then, look at a thought about the future.

What is the future thought ‘made of’?
WHEN does the future thought appear?
What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘future’ thought?
How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘future’ thought refers to something that will happen?

Then let’s compare a thought about past and a thought about the future. What is the EXACT difference between the thoughts about past and future? If there is difference and how is that difference is known exactly?



Have fun with it! ALLOW it, if that is working for you.

Much love,

[ossie123]

Hi,

Better late than never. It's almost midnight here. So I promised you a memory exercise, and here it is.

Also, I want you to reread your own thread from beginning to end. And are you still reading Gateless Gatecrashers?

Just this bit for now. I read about half the book and stopped to focus on the exercises. Will get back to it.
I did read the entire thread this morning, just finished. It confirmed my "story" to me and I can see through a lot of what I did and why. Typically I think I am doing worse than I really am and think others are judging me poorly (or as poorly as I judge myself) so I try extra hard (mostly with humour or intellectualisations) which seems to make things worse. I also appreciated your patience and calm steering of the discussions.

Tried the memory exercise last night on reading your post but will do it again and LOOK before responding.

[Anastacia42]

Great! LOOKING is what it's all about!

Much love,

[ossie123]

Memory Exercise

Almost everybody believes that a memory thought is referring to something that has happened. That a memory thought is a different thought than a non-memory thought.

Please don’t go to thought explanations, but just let a memory be there, and look at it. Look at what is actually going on and not what thoughts say - but what actually is.

OK. Short and sweet.

What is memory exactly?

A thought.

What is the memory ‘made of’?

Content. This is thought to be of the past so is labelled a memory but is really just made of content like any other thought. I can't see a difference.

WHEN does the memory appear?

It appears in the thought (if I understand the question) as it happens, not when the “event” happened.

What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘memory’ thought? How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened?

This is the interesting bit…. The memory thought is “believed”. That seems to be the only difference. A random general thought seems identical to a thought about cooking dinner last night. They have the same source and randomness and appearance of time but one is believed. There is no way to know EXACTLY that a memory thought has happened. Even the “memory” of cooking dinner had to be corrected from spatula to tongs when remembered but the belief in memory means this does not question the content at all even if it was wrong. The belief in "memory" is stronger than the reality. Hmmmm.

Then, look at a thought about the future.

What is the future thought ‘made of’?

Content. Just content, same as any general thought.

WHEN does the future thought appear?

It appears with the thought, as the thought happens (not in the future).

What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘future’ thought?

No difference. I guess a “time” is assigned to the future thought but that is just content anyway.

How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘future’ thought refers to something that will happen?

There is no way to know something will happen in the future, or even that the thought refers to something in the future, it is just content.

Then let’s compare a thought about past and a thought about the future. What is the EXACT difference between the thoughts about past and future? If there is difference and how is that difference is known exactly?

There is no real difference apart from the content. The random general thought, memory and future thought are all the same stuff, just with differing content.

The only difference I can find is that after the thought arises, the thoughts are assigned different meanings and some are believed and others not based on the meaning. (Thoughts about thoughts!) I create a difference where there is none.

[Anastacia42]

Hi Ossie,

While noticing all of these various aspects, such as that thinking happens and the content of thought is meaningless or that time is just a thought or memory is just a thought or body is just a thought is great to know, the point of all of this is LOOKING and SEEING.

Do you still notice that you're answering with right answers, but not actually SEEING?

Any one of these exercises we do here can bring your awareness to SEEING if you let it. That means if you relax into it and take some time with it.

It seems that tracing thought back to the beginning is the one where you got closest to LOOKING and not thinking. You got frustrated because you weren't relaxing much, but you are actually looking. Is that your experience?



Much love,

[ossie123]

It seems that tracing thought back to the beginning is the one where you got closest to LOOKING and not thinking. You got frustrated because you weren't relaxing much, but you are actually looking. Is that your experience?

Yes, no, maybe???

I opened the gatecrashers book at a random page and it was Charles so I re-read it from the bullet points. It sounded a lot like me and my experience and frustrations. At the end he did something similar to my watch the watcher and he SAW it, and it was like... Is that all there is to it?

Maybe I was waiting for the thunder claps and the realisation to be wearing bells and whistles so I missed the obvious.

I was SEEing the fact there is no self and also no higher self and "I just happen". I always thought there was an "I" controlling my attention but I saw this was not actual experience. I know this because it surprised me and went against my established belief that I control attention rather than I just happen within attention.

Is it so simple I missed it even though i SAW it?

[Anastacia42]

Hi Ossie,

I opened the gatecrashers book at a random page and it was Charles so I re-read it from the bullet points. It sounded a lot like me and my experience and frustrations. At the end he did something similar to my watch the watcher and he SAW it, and it was like... Is that all there is to it?

I am re-reading this one to see why you resonate with it. Yes, you are doing way too much analyzing and not enough LOOKING, as he was. This last post, for example.

Maybe I was waiting for the thunder claps and the realisation to be wearing bells and whistles so I missed the obvious.

No, the heavens will not part and there will be no singing or dancing in the streets. No bells and whistles. The shift *can* be very subtle. At the same time, it is felt, known, awareness happens.

I was SEEing the fact there is no self and also no higher self and "I just happen". I always thought there was an "I" controlling my attention but I saw this was not actual experience. I know this because it surprised me and went against my established belief that I control attention rather than I just happen within attention.

Good. Yes. The surprise is a good clue. Keep LOOKING. Reality doesn't go away, but our attention does. Pay attention. Where is this "I"? It is the LOOKING that matters.

If unsure what to LOOK at, try something basic, like: Can you find the place where your butt ends and the chair begins? LOOK

I just happen within attention.

Yes!

Is it so simple I missed it even though i SAW it?

That is possible. Tell me about what you SEE.

Much love,

[ossie123]

Hi,

I'm going back to basics like you suggested and it might take a while.

This morning while lying in bed (relaxing) I went back to where my body ended and the bed began, the line between them. There was just pressure with no line, then I felt a sore tooth. This was labelled "pain" but was felt as pressure but just more intense than the pressure on my body. The content of my thoughts said the pain of the tooth was inside my body and the pressure of the bed was from outside.

I saw that they were the same, just pressure. Just a sensation. Then I had my thumb under my body with more pressure on it and I couldn't tell which pressure was the thumb and which was the shoulder. If looked at it the pressure dissipated through the whole region. Interestingly the exact same thing happened with the pressure from the tooth. If I looked at it the pressure dissipated through the whole region and dissipated. No more sore tooth.

There is no distinction between inside or outside, no boundary.

Will need to do more looking.

[Anastacia42]

Excellent! Let me know how that goes.

[ossie123]

Hi,

Tried a few different things with no luck.

Did the "settle in the space between thoughts", and the next morning watch the watcher, and then last night to trace the thoughts back to where they came from. Still being carried away and no real SEEing is going on.

I will now go back to more basic basics and just LOOK. No bird and no apple and no content of thoughts. Just sensations and thoughts arising.

Did it a bit this morning and not bad but I will do it for as long as I can during the day both in quiet times and when doing other things. The more I do it the more natural it will become and then I can relax a little and let go of the trying to do it and just let it happen.

Will keep you in the loop.

[ossie123]

Oh,

Forgot to mention. Most of the other attempts above are "in my head" which is the worst place for me to be. Just LOOKing centres me in the body which is a different approach for me so I should have less expectations.

Ossie