Emptiness

[Aragon]

Hi Gerd,

Thanks for your answers:

How long do you want to go down the route of listening to that thought?

I agree, that’s exactly what is happening! So in a way this thought is coming in through the back door. Ok., so what can be done? Just saying ‘an I cannot be found, so there is no I’.

See the thought as a thought. Where can the 'I' be found outside of thought?

What is the difference between the imagined melon and 'Gerd'?
If there are any differences, what are they?
Can these differences be found in your direct actual experience?

The imagined melon is a face value of thought with an imagined content. With Gerd there are AE’s of colour, smell, taste, sound, sensation.

The label ‘Gerd’ is AE of thought and not AE of Gerd
Colour labelled ‘Gerd’ is AE of colour and not AE of Gerd
Sound labelled ‘Gerd’ is AE of sound and not AE of Gerd
Sensation labelled ‘Gerd’ is AE of sensation and not AE of Gerd
Taste labelled ‘Gerd’ is AE of taste and not AE of Gerd
Smell labelled ‘Gerd’ is AE of smell and not AE of Gerd
Thoughts ABOUT Gerd are AE of thought and not AE of Gerd.

So label + colour + sound + sensation + taste + smell + thoughts about Gerd are known…but is Gerd actually known?

Does the label Gerd know anything about Gerd?
Does colour know anything about Gerd?
Does sound know anything about Gerd?
Does sensation know anything about Gerd
Does taste know anything about Gerd
Does smell know anything about Gerd
Do the thought themselves know anything about Gerd?
Can an object called ‘Gerd’ be found at all, or all that is experienced is label + colour + sound + sensation + taste + smell + thought?

Wishing you well,

Aragon

[Gerd]

Hi Aragon,

See the thought as a thought. Where can the 'I' be found outside of thought?

The ‘I’ cannot be found outside of thought.

So label + colour + sound + sensation + taste + smell + thoughts about Gerd are known…but is Gerd actually known?

Gerd cannot be known. This refers to the apple-exercise…. An apple cannot be known.

Does the label Gerd know anything about Gerd?
Does colour know anything about Gerd?
Does sound know anything about Gerd?
Does sensation know anything about Gerd
Does taste know anything about Gerd
Does smell know anything about Gerd
Do the thought themselves know anything about Gerd?

Label, colour, sound, sensation, taste, smell and thought doesn’t know anything about Gerd.

Can an object called ‘Gerd’ be found at all, or all that is experienced is label + colour + sound + sensation + taste + smell + thought?

There is only AE of colour, sound, sensation, taste, smell, thought. An object called Gerd cannot be found.

Thank You, Gerd

[Aragon]

Hi Gerd,

Thanks for your reply. Apologies for the delayed response.

Can you tell me what you found and what you feel after doing those exercises? Is there still any confusion around the the idea of an "I" and that it exists? Has life changed in any way?

Wishing you well,

Aragon

[Gerd]

Hi Aragon,

Can you tell me what you found and what you feel after doing those exercises? Is there still any confusion around the the idea of an "I" and that it exists?

I am reading the thread every day and it helps me to remember or realize that there is no ‘I’. Often during the day I am living in the world of ‘I’. So there is a constant backward and forward. It’s not like once understood always understood. So I will stay with the thread further on until it’s getting more settled.

Has life changed in any way?

I think I am more relaxed in life. It is easier to accept life as it is. Sometimes I succeed in just leaning back and watching what’s happening instead of interfering (what I would have done before).

Thank You, Gerd

[Aragon]

Hi Gerd,

I have rethought my last post in order to clarify my response to your last message.....

I think I am more relaxed in life. It is easier to accept life as it is. Sometimes I succeed in just leaning back and watching what’s happening instead of interfering (what I would have done before).

Can you tell me, when you do interfere:
- how do you actually interfere?
- what do you do to interfere ?

then,
- where can this interferer be found?
- where is the controller that can interfere with what is happening?
- where is the decision maker that decides to interfere?

Also:

I am reading the thread every day and it helps me to remember or realize that there is no ‘I’. Often during the day I am living in the world of ‘I’. So there is a constant backward and forward. It’s not like once understood always understood. So I will stay with the thread further on until it’s getting more settled.

While re-reading this thread is good....it is the constant and diligent looking throughout the day to what actually IS...what your actual experience is - that is needed.

Can you find the "I" when you look...if not, what do you find?

Wishing you well,

Aragon

[Gerd]

Hi Aragon,

- how do you actually interfere?

For example in the office, if someone suggests to go right and my opinion is that it is better to go left I would have interfered. Now (when I’m aware and in the mode of looking) I just let it happen as it happens. As it happens anyway the way it happens.

- what do you do to interfere ?

I say what I think should be said.

- where can this interferer be found?

An interferer cannot be found.

- where is the controller that can interfere with what is happening?

There is no controller.

- where is the decision maker that decides to interfere?

There is no decision maker. So, trapped again! So interfering or not interfering is just happening.

Can you find the "I" when you look...if not, what do you find?

When I am looking, there is no I. There is just colour, sound, sensation….

Thank You, Gerd

[Aragon]

Hi Gerd,

Thanks for your answers, nice :)

- where can this interferer be found?

An interferer cannot be found.

Yes, no interferer can be found

- where is the controller that can interfere with what is happening?

There is no controller.

Yes, no controller can be found

- where is the decision maker that decides to interfere?

There is no decision maker. So, trapped again! So interfering or not interfering is just happening.

Yes, no decision maker can be found.


Perfect :) How does it feel to see this?

Can you find the "I" when you look...if not, what do you find?

When I am looking, there is no I. There is just colour, sound, sensation….

Yes :) Can you take this even further....

Thought labels experience as colour, sound, sensation, smell, taste .... what happens if even these labels are dropped? What do you find?

........................................................

Let’s have a look at the idea of the body.
Sit with eyes closed for about 15 minutes.
Paying attention only to the pure sensations, without relying on thoughts or mental images:

Can it be known how tall the body is?
Does the body have a weight or volume?
In actual experience does the body have a shape or a form?

Is there a boundary between the body and the clothing?
Is there a boundary between the body and the chair?

Is there an inside or an outside?
If there is an inside - inside of what exactly?
If there is an outside, the outside of what exactly?

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to?
What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

Look very carefully, especially with the last question. Take your time, don’t rush. You can look several times during the day while doing other things (like washing hands, showering, having a short break from work, walking, etc.) before replying.

Wishing you well,

Aragon

[Gerd]

Hi Aragon,

sorry for answering late!

Perfect :) How does it feel to see this?

It is new and feels a bit strange that it is so. Also rarely during the day (when I succeed being in the mode of looking) it happens that it seems that I have the choice to interfere or not. But it is apparently not.

Thought labels experience as colour, sound, sensation, smell, taste .... what happens if even these labels are dropped? What do you find?

There is only actual experience which cannot be described.

Can it be known how tall the body is?

No, it cannot be known.

Does the body have a weight or volume?

No, there is no weight or volume.

In actual experience does the body have a shape or a form?

No, there is no shape or form.

Is there a boundary between the body and the clothing?

No, there is no boundary between body and clothing.

Is there a boundary between the body and the chair?

No, there is no boundary between body and chair.

Is there an inside or an outside?

No, there is no inside or outside.

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to?

It refers to actual experiences (colour, smell, taste, sound, sensation) concerning body (not concerning apple as it was in the exercise at the beginning of the thread). But a body cannot be known.

What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

The actual experience of the body is colour, smell, taste…
But body is not in actual experience.

Thank You, Gerd

[Aragon]

Hi Gerd,

Thanks for your reply....

Perfect :) How does it feel to see this?

It is new and feels a bit strange that it is so. Also rarely during the day (when I succeed being in the mode of looking) it happens that it seems that I have the choice to interfere or not. But it is apparently not.

And can feeling 'a bit strange' be okay? Does it need to be any different?

The “I” that the thought refers to, is in the narrative about having choice to interfere.

The thought “I have the choice to interfere or not” can be found, but can an actual “I” be found in the thought itself?
Does the thought contain an actual “I” or only thoughts about an “I” that can seemingly choose whether or not to interfere?

But thought then says…BUT it feels like there is an “I” that is choosing and this feeling feels so real.

Does that thought contain an “I” or is only the thought found with its content that talk about a feeling that is an “I” that feels so real?

Does the feeling itself know anything about an “I”?
Can a feeling choose to interfere?

Thought labels experience as colour, sound, sensation, smell, taste .... what happens if even these labels are dropped? What do you find?

There is only actual experience which cannot be described.

Yes…exactly! So become aware of that instead of trying to find an “I” that can never be found! Place your focus on what IS instead of what isn’t.

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to?

It refers to actual experiences (colour, smell, taste, sound, sensation) concerning body (not concerning apple as it was in the exercise at the beginning of the thread). But a body cannot be known.

This was a tricky question! ;) The word/label ‘body' actually refers to AE of thought only.

What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

The actual experience of the body is colour, smell, taste…
But body is not in actual experience.

The AE of the body = thought.

Thought points to colour, sound, smell, taste and sensation and labels it ‘body’. There are no objects of any description…so colour, sound, smell, taste and sensation cannot be objectified as a body.


Have a look:-
- Can an actual body be found in colour, sound, smell, taste or sensation?
- Colour is simply colour. Does colour know anything about an object labelled as body?
- Sound is simply sound. Does sound know anything about a body?
- Sensation is simply sensation. Does sensation know anything about a body?
- Smell is simply smell. Does smell know anything about a body?
- Taste is simply taste. Does taste know anything about a body?

As you said….body is not actual experience….so there can only ever be label + thoughts about the body. Thoughts and label are known…but a body is not known.


Let's go a little deeper with out investigation of the body. Please follow each step, don't leave out any. Take your time. Don't move to the next step until the previous one is clearly seen. Repeat the exercise several times.

Stand in front of a bigger mirror.

(1) First, close the eyes and feel the sensations labelled ‘body’.

(2) Then open the eyes and look into the mirror while still paying attention to the sensations.

Is there any connection between the felt sensations and the image in the mirror?
Or just thoughts (and/or mental images) suggest that there is?


(3) While still paying attention to the sensations move one hand and observe the movement from the mirror.

Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and image of movement in the mirror?

(4) Now do the same movement with the hand, but this time look at the hand directly, not from the mirror.

Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and the image ‘of movement’?
Or only thoughts suggest it?

(5) Now, pay attention only to the image in the mirror.

Does the image by itself suggest in any way that is ‘you’ or ‘your body’?
Does the image itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘body’ at all?
Or are there only colours and shapes?

(6) Where the mirror ends, some parts of the body (probably legs) cannot be seen.

Just by the image in the mirror, is there any ‘knowledge’ that there must be legs, or only thoughts and mental images suggest so?

(7) Now turn away from the mirror and look forward (don’t look directly to any body parts).

Is there a ‘body’ anywhere when all thoughts and images are ignored, or are there only sensations?

(8) Start to walk slowly.

Is there a ‘body walking’, or are there only sensations?
Is there actual experience of ‘walking’ at all?
Or just THOUGHTS ABOUT ‘walking’?
Can such a thing as ‘body’ be found OR just THOUGHTS ABOUT a ‘body’?
Can such a thing as ‘walking’ be found?

(9) Are the sensations localized in space, like ‘going through the room’; OR is there only an image that is labelled ‘room’ and appearing sensations without any location?
[/quote]

Wishing you well,

Aragon

[Gerd]

Hi Aragon,

And can feeling 'a bit strange' be okay? Does it need to be any different?

Feeling ‘a bit strange’ is ok. It doesn't need to be different. :-)

The thought “I have the choice to interfere or not” can be found, but can an actual “I” be found in the thought itself?
Does the thought contain an actual “I” or only thoughts about an “I” that can seemingly choose whether or not to interfere?

Yes, an actual ‘I’ cannot be found. There are only thoughts about an ‘I’.

But thought then says…BUT it feels like there is an “I” that is choosing and this feeling feels so real.

That’s exactly what is happening! It feels so real!!

Does that thought contain an “I” or is only the thought found with its content that talk about a feeling that is an “I” that feels so real?

There is only the thought with a content that talks about a feeling that is an ‘I’ that feels so real.

Does the feeling itself know anything about an “I”?

No, the feeling cannot know anything about an ‘I’.

Can a feeling choose to interfere?

No, a feeling cannot interfere.

Is there any connection between the felt sensations and the image in the mirror?
Or just thoughts (and/or mental images) suggest that there is?

No, there is no connection between the sensation and the colour (image in the mirror). Thoughts are connecting sensation and colour.

Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and image of movement in the mirror?

No, there is no connection between the sensations and the image of the movement (colour).

Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and the image ‘of movement’?
Or only thoughts suggest it?

Only thoughts are connecting the sensation and the image.

Does the image by itself suggest in any way that is ‘you’ or ‘your body’?

No, the image doesn’t suggest a you or your.

Does the image itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘body’ at all?
Or are there only colours and shapes?

No, the image doesn’t suggest a ‘body’ at all. There are only colours and shapes.

Just by the image in the mirror, is there any ‘knowledge’ that there must be legs, or only thoughts and mental images suggest so?

No, there is no knowledge about legs. There are only thoughts suggesting so.

Is there a ‘body’ anywhere when all thoughts and images are ignored, or are there only sensations?

No, there is no ‘body’. There are only sensations.

Is there a ‘body walking’, or are there only sensations?

There are only sensations.

Is there actual experience of ‘walking’ at all?
Or just THOUGHTS ABOUT ‘walking’?

There is only AE of sensation. ‘Walking’ is a label/thought.

Can such a thing as ‘body’ be found OR just THOUGHTS ABOUT a ‘body’?

There are only thoughts about a body.

Can such a thing as ‘walking’ be found?

Walking cannot be found. There is only AE of sensation (of walking) and ‘walking’ is label/thought.

Are the sensations localized in space, like ‘going through the room’; OR is there only an image that is labelled ‘room’ and appearing sensations without any location?

There is no connection between sensation and space/room. Sensations don’t have any location. Only colour has a connection to location. But the connection between sensation and colour is a thought.

Merry Christmas, Aragon! I wish You all the best. Thank You for Your support and Your patience!
Gerd

[Aragon]

Hey Gerd, thanks for your reply. I will respond tomorrow. I hope you are having a lovely Christmas, best wishes, Aragon.

[Aragon]

Hi Gerd,

Are the sensations localized in space, like ‘going through the room’; OR is there only an image that is labelled ‘room’ and appearing sensations without any location?

There is no connection between sensation and space/room. Sensations don’t have any location. Only colour has a connection to location. But the connection between sensation and colour is a thought.

Can you spend a little time looking at colour... Notice. Is there anything present in colour that gives you a location? Does colour itself suggest in any way that it is located and has a location?

And can location be found in actual experience? What is the actual experience of location?

Wishing you well,

Aragon

[Gerd]

Hi Aragon,

Can you spend a little time looking at colour... Notice. Is there anything present in colour that gives you a location? Does colour itself suggest in any way that it is located and has a location?

Ok., I understand: there is no location in AE of colour. There is just colour.

And can location be found in actual experience? What is the actual experience of location?

No, location cannot be found in AE. Location is a thought. So it is AE of thought.

Thank You, Gerd

[Aragon]

Hi Gerd,

Thanks you for your response. Nice looking :)

Earlier you said this:

But thought then says…BUT it feels like there is an “I” that is choosing and this feeling feels so real.

That’s exactly what is happening! It feels so real!!

The sense of self, “I” is so ingrained into the body and is hard to see past. The subtle vibration of the body continually reaffirms the sense of self, “I”. This is so ingrained that it seems the body is what I am. Added to this is the idea that the body sees, hears, tastes, smells, feels and thinks.

So let's investigate the belief that 'I am this body' and the belief that the body, as a separate item, is responsible or is 'DOING' the senses - 'I see', 'I hear', 'I feel' etc

We will begin with 'seeing' - Just that one sense on its own.

With eyes closed, take in a couple of deep breaths to settle the dust.
Then notice there is the experience of 'blackness'. There may a bright light, a red glow, sparkly bits or cloudy flecks appearing and disappearing - It really doesn't matter about the specifics. We are just noticing ‘blackness’.


1) With eyes closed, can you confirm that what is experienced is simply AE of colour labelled ‘black’?
2) Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than seeing ‘black’?
3) Can what is seeing ‘black’ be found?
4) Can a pair of eyes be found that is ‘seeing’ ‘black’?
5) Can an 'I' / 'me' / person be found that is ‘seeing’ ‘black’?


Is there anything that is witnessing the colour labelled ‘black’? Or ‘black’ just is?

Look very carefully. Where does ‘seeing’ end and colour begin? Can a dividing line between ‘seeing’ and colour be found? Or is there just seeing/colour?

Can a 'see-er' ever be found in 'what is being seen' – AE colour?

If that is all, and no INHERENT SEE-ER found . . . would anything that is suggested as the see-er be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

Okay….then open the eyes and look around.

Is there a difference between the ‘black’ when eyes are closed and ‘colour’ when eyes are open or are they both simply the appearance of colour?

Is there anything that is witnessing colour?

Is the ‘see-er’ of the seen actually separate from the seen, or is it all a singular experience? In other words, Is seeing, see-er and seen one and the same thing?


Take your time and answer when you are ready.

Wishing you well,

Aragon

[Gerd]

Hi Aragon,

1) With eyes closed, can you confirm that what is experienced is simply AE of colour labelled ‘black’?

Yes, there is only AE of colour labelled ‘black’.

2) Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than seeing ‘black’?

No, there is only seeing ‘black’.

3) Can what is seeing ‘black’ be found?

No, nothing can be found that is seeing black.

4) Can a pair of eyes be found that is ‘seeing’ ‘black’?

No, a pair of eyes seeing black cannot be found.

5) Can an 'I' / 'me' / person be found that is ‘seeing’ ‘black’?

No I/me/person can be found that is seeing black.

Is there anything that is witnessing the colour labelled ‘black’? Or ‘black’ just is?

The colour labeled black just is.

Look very carefully. Where does ‘seeing’ end and colour begin? Can a dividing line between ‘seeing’ and colour be found? Or is there just seeing/colour?

There is just seeing/colour. The AE of colour is seeing. There is no dividing line.

Can a 'see-er' ever be found in 'what is being seen' – AE colour?

No see-er can be found.

If that is all, and no INHERENT SEE-ER found . . . would anything that is suggested as the see-er be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

Yes, any suggested seer would be a concept/idea/thought.

Is there a difference between the ‘black’ when eyes are closed and ‘colour’ when eyes are open or are they both simply the appearance of colour?

There is no difference. Eyes closed or open are both the appearance of colour.

Is there anything that is witnessing colour?

No, there is nothing witnessing.

Is the ‘see-er’ of the seen actually separate from the seen, or is it all a singular experience? In other words, Is seeing, see-er and seen one and the same thing?

I spend quite a while with this question and I understand where you are pointing to. But I don’t really get that seeing, see-er and seen is one and the same thing. I understand, if there is no seen there can’t be seeing.

Thank You, Gerd