What do I do now?

[Declan]

Hey Adam,


There’s nothing behind the sensations. Sensations just arise. Often followed by a thought (“I’m hungry / angry / tired). Actually I don’t know which comes first - the sensation or the thought, or if it matters. I think in DE, the sensation comes first. Does it matter? I don’t know.


There is no strange evaluator . It’s a thought / opinion. The opinion / thought feels like it leads to another thought but it can’t influence the DE.


Free will is a thought that seems real (but it’s not). It’s the illusion of choice. It feels strong in me. “I think” I have choice. I think my brain, my thoughts, are telling my thumbs to tap the correct letters to write this sentence. Is that true? Could another sentence have been written by my thumbs? I don’t know. Like the hand flipping exercises. I never saw that the hand was just moving. I saw that my thoughts were telling the hand when to move. But this can’t be true in DE because a thought has no power to control? I feel confused about this.

Best

Declan


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Declan]

Hey Adam,


There’s nothing behind the sensations. Sensations just arise. Often followed by a thought (“I’m hungry / angry / tired). Actually I don’t know which comes first - the sensation or the thought, or if it matters. I think in DE, the sensation comes first. Does it matter? I don’t know.


There is no strange evaluator . It’s a thought / opinion. The opinion / thought feels like it leads to another thought but it can’t influence the DE.


Free will is a thought that seems real (but it’s not). It’s the illusion of choice. It feels strong in me. “I think” I have choice. I think my brain, my thoughts, are telling my thumbs to tap the correct letters to write this sentence. Is that true? Could another sentence have been written by my thumbs? I don’t know. Like the hand flipping exercises. I never saw that the hand was just moving. I saw that my thoughts were telling the hand when to move. But this can’t be true in DE because a thought has no power to control? I feel confused about this.

Best

Declan


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NoMansLand]

Hi Declan,

Free will is a thought that seems real (but it’s not). It’s the illusion of choice. It feels strong in me. “I think” I have choice. I think my brain, my thoughts, are telling my thumbs to tap the correct letters to write this sentence. Is that true? Could another sentence have been written by my thumbs? I don’t know. Like the hand flipping exercises. I never saw that the hand was just moving. I saw that my thoughts were telling the hand when to move. But this can’t be true in DE because a thought has no power to control? I feel confused about this.

Watch this:
https://vimeo.com/90101368
Let me know if you're still confused.

There’s nothing behind the sensations. Sensations just arise. Often followed by a thought (“I’m hungry / angry / tired). Actually I don’t know which comes first - the sensation or the thought, or if it matters. I think in DE, the sensation comes first. Does it matter? I don’t know.

Can a thought do anything but describe? If yes - give me examples.
Observe if you can separate thought from looking without the labels.

Do they appear in a different "place"? Does the sound appear in a different place to thoughts, or do sounds appear in exactly the same "field" that the thoughts appear in?

Can you find an actual line/wall/boundary that divides the thoughts and the sound? Or is the line a mental construct?

Do you have to overcome any obstruction in order for sound to appear in exactly the same "field" that the thoughts appear in?

Can cause and effect exist beyond thought content? If not how can thoughts cause sensations (e.g. labelled "moving of the hand")

If there is no "time" but only NOW, when would possibly the thoughts cause anything?

Best,
Adam

[Declan]

Hey Adam,

Thanks for the video. Very interesting.


A thought can only describe.

“Observe if you can separate thought from looking without the labels”. I’m not sure what you mean. Do you mean try to observe thought without labels (I can’t - it’s all labels), or do you mean try to separate thought from looking?


I don’t know if there’s a separate field or place. They both just seem to appear. What do you mean by field and / or place?


It’s a mental construct - one appears to come from outside the head and the other seems to come from inside the head - but that’s a construct.


The thoughts can’t cause the sensation - it just appears that way in the illusion.


No, no obstruction. But I’m not exactly sure what is meant by field.


If there is no time, there cannot be a when.

Labelling

Seeing cars and people - simply seeing

Feeling the hard table against forearms - simply sensation

Hearing music and voices - simply hearing

Feeling angry - simply thought and sensation

Tasting something in my mouth - simply tasting

Smelling warm air and - simply smelling.

Thanks

Declan


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NoMansLand]

Hi Declan,

“A thought can only describe.”

Exactly.

“don’t know if there’s a separate field or place. They both just seem to appear. What do you mean by field and / or place?”

Basically the field of direct experience. Is there a field called “Declan” and a field called “direct experience”? Or is there no such a thing as you look in DE?

“It’s a mental construct - one appears to come from outside the head and the other seems to come from inside the head - but that’s a construct.”

“Seems” points to an assumption and knowledge and not what is actually happening. You must remember that. It’s not just semantics. It’s an answer in a flux. A guessing game. But something can be either true or not true in direct. How does it seem to come from inside the head? Look again.

Listen to the sounds and thoughts arising. Where are they localized? Are they even localized?

“The thoughts can’t cause the sensation - it just appears that way in the illusion. “

How does it appear that way though? Go do this exercise one more time - the moving hand one. Does it really appear that way or you just assume it does? Do it a few times if you must and simply look - can thinking cause a sensation?

“If there is no time, there cannot be a when”

Is cause and effect truth or just an assumption then? Can cause and effect actually exist if there cannot be when? When you say “Declan seems to control his actions” or “Declan feels like me” or “Declan has free will” is it true or it just seems that way - is just an assumption that has no basis in direct experience? What is actually happening in direct experience? Look closely.

The following link is a 7 minute clip of a soccer game. If you prefer another sport...please feel free to find one to do this exercise with.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yy5pL-myDzw

1. Watch one minute with the sound turned OFF, watching ‘people’ messing about with a round thing on a field, up and down, up and down. Let it sink in, the whole experience.

2. Once the first minute is completed, now watch another whole minute with the commentary turned ON.
Notice the differences. Notice how the commentator (thought) offers lots of know-how, even advice. It seems to feel as though they can influence, somehow, what is going on, as though one outcome is much preferred to the opposite outcome. The commentary may seem to heighten any supporter feelings which are there, and call for an identification with one team or other, and with the importance of the game itself.

3. Now turn the volume OFF AGAIN and just watch the action with NO audible commentary, the shapes moving around on the screen etc. Again notice all the differences in what is appearing as experience.

4. Now turn the volume ON again and ignore what you think you know thought is talking about, and just notice it as sound.

What did you find when doing this exercise?
Is the commentary on the soccer game a necessity for the play to happen?
And in the same way, is the inner narration of thought a necessity for the play of life to happen?

Best
Adam

[Declan]

Hey Adam,

A busy few days so I might do this one in 2 parts (football exercise second)


I used the word “seems” deliberately, that’s why I said “that’s just a construct.”

I think we’re back to the DE discussion. I can write everything as I should see it it in DE or I can point out how things still “seem” to me, even though they’re not true in DE.


In DE there’s just hearing but to me, the sounds appear from near and far. Like I said, the thoughts feel internal. I’ve looked and looked in DE but the thoughts still feel personal and internal to me.


It’s strange. At times I can just see “hand moving” and at other times I’m convinced “my” brain is sending a message (which is connected to a thought?) “asking the hand to move. I’ll keep on with it.


It’s an assumption outside of DE

I’ll look at the second exercise now.

Declan


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Declan]

Hello again Adam,


I didn’t notice very much to be honest.

Commentary definitely not needed for the play to happen.

The inner narrator is definitely not needed for life to happen. But I can’t seem to just take it as thought. I get lost in it. I feel like crying. I wish I could just see it as thought.

Labelling

Writing this now

Seeing the letters on the phone keyboard - simply seeing

Hearing the air con - simply hearing

Feeling my foot against the hard floor - simply sensation

Smelling and tasting something nondescript- simply smelling and tasting

Thoughts about trying to hurry this so I can jump on my non dual guidance call - simply thought.

Thank you,

Declan


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NoMansLand]

Declan,

I think we’re back to the DE discussion. I can write everything as I should see it it in DE or I can point out how things still “seem” to me, even though they’re not true in DE.

It's not that thoughts of "seeming" cannot arise anymore. Or you are not able to use "mental constructs". They are useful for communicating. They are part of Direct Experience, but only as content of arising thoughts. They don't define what is. It just serves as a communication device, even though you may get another thought that says" But it still seems so real"... Continue to look at the fact of thoughts arising and vanishing, and another thoughts taking their place. And on and on. Just look.

Does anything remain at all? A thought of identification arose. So what? Does it imply there is somebody identifying with it, or does it simply arise as a thought with quality and content of identification? Is it different than any other thought?

There may still be the feeling of identification of being the ‘doer’. That it still ‘feels’ like there is a self that is the ‘chooser’. So let’s have a look at this as it has to do with the sense of seeing.
Take a few relaxed breaths to let the dust settle for a while, and then: Look on your right.
Then look on your left.
Finally, bring your head back to centre, close your eyes and look in front.
Okay, so when you look on the right, the view on the right is seen (whatever that is).
When you look on the left, the view on the left is seen (whatever that is).
And then, when you look in front of you with eyes closed, the view in front is seen (ie ‘black space’).
So, when the view on the right is seen, do you have the ‘choice’ not to see? I’m not asking can you ‘choose’ to see something else like another view or ‘black space’ if you close your eyes. The question is; can you turn seeing off? Can you NOT see what is seen?
Same thing with the view on the left, can you NOT see the view on the left?
Same thing with the view in front with closed eyes, can you NOT see the ‘black space’? Can you turn off seeing?
What did the 'chooser' choose? Did a 'self' choose something?
If you are unable to choose what you're aware of, then what else is there to choose?

The inner narrator is definitely not needed for life to happen. But I can’t seem to just take it as thought. I get lost in it. I feel like crying. I wish I could just see it as thought.

It's all good. It's part of the story. The story doesn't go away. It just is seen as a story only. Thoughts still arise. It's not going to stop. Crying will still happen, and feeling like crying will also happen. Thoughts of wishing will arise. Thoughts of getting lost in thought can still happen. But are they arising to anybody? Do they belong to anybody? Are they thought by anybody? Can anything choose NOT to let the thoughts arise? Is there anything that a thought can DO? Have you ever actually witnessed that?

Writing this now

Seeing the letters on the phone keyboard - simply seeing

Hearing the air con - simply hearing

Feeling my foot against the hard floor - simply sensation

Smelling and tasting something nondescript- simply smelling and tasting

Thoughts about trying to hurry this so I can jump on my non dual guidance call - simply thought.

Great that you keep at this too. Try to give more examples from different times of the day but not written as a memory.
More like to write them down as they happen. Not just to write it down, but to actually look and report on what actually happens.

Keep the momentum going.

Best,
Adam

[Declan]

Dear Adam,

Thanks for the reply and the tips and encouragement.

I’ve just started listening to a guy called Peter Brown and I think I can feel some sort of shift occurring.

I am going to take a few days break from this conversation and see where I am after more listening to Peter Brown.

It feels as though I’m hitting a wall in this conversation because I spend so much time taking screenshots and working out which bits I should reply to, I think my answers and the experience have started to feel mechanical or not “truthful”.

I’ll try the looking left and right exercise and let you know what happens.

Thank you,

Declan


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NoMansLand]

Declan,
No amount of listening instead of actually looking will produce any kind of shift.
All the teaching, however valuable and precise, is just more beliefs if you're not actively looking.
Illusion is seen or not - but is there a seer of illusion, or just a different description by thoughts?

Again - this is not about new states, or new powers, or anything out of the ordinary. It is quite super-ordinary.
That it might look too simple and ordinary to be true but it is something that can be easily verified. This is not about magical states.

It feels as though I’m hitting a wall in this conversation because I spend so much time taking screenshots and working out which bits I should reply to, I think my answers and the experience have started to feel mechanical or not “truthful”.

It's all good. Why do you feel it's bad? Hitting the wall until you collapse the wall. The mechanical habit of identifying is also just a reflex. By looking, and looking, and looking you crumble the wall. But the fact remains the wall is not real. It's just a glitch. You think you're hitting the wall while constantly directly experiencing it all.

Truth doesn't care if you're not truthful, or your efforts are mechanical. It's still here anyway. You just notice what is present and what is not - if it is not truthful then it is in thought content - it's that simple. All else is a story.

Your anger, frustration, sadness, resignation - it's all stuff that appears and vanishes. You're bargaining with new teaching also. It's part of direct experience. It's not something that proves you're NOT on the right path at all. Only the story you entertain "seems" to show that.

Is there someone who is frustrated, or there is only frustration just happening, but without an entity, a person, Declan, being frustrated?

Is there anything else to doubt than just a thought saying "I'm not sure... I doubt this and that"?

Is there anything/experiencer that experiences these shifts?

Continue looking. I'll wait for the previous exercise report.

Best,
Adam

[Declan]

Hi Adam,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, much appreciated.

As requested - here’s the last exercise:


Looking to the right, there’s no choice not to see. I can’t turn seeing off.

Same thing with the view on the left.

And with the front - I can NOT see the darker space.

What did the chooser choose - nothing. There was no choice.

What else is there to choose? I really don’t know. Nothing?

Labelling

Seeing the blank tv screen and pictures on the wall - simply seeing

Hearing the hum of the aircon and traffic in the distance, simply hearing

Feeling the palm of my hand on the back of my head simply sensation

Tasting the remains of a burger in my mouth, simply tasting

Smelling the artificial room fragrance, simply smelling.

Thanks,

Declan


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Declan]

Hi Adam,

Just an extra question Adam, I hope that’s okay. Is Thought part of direct experience?

it seems to me that Thought is there, the content of thought is an illusion, but the fact of Thought is part of direct experience.

Would you agree?

Thanks

Declan


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NoMansLand]

Hi Declan,
The fact of thoughts arising is undeniable, correct?
They arise, vanish, do their thing and that's all there is to it.

But what about the content of thoughts?
Is the content of thoughts correct?
Is the content of thoughts an actual direct experience?

Drop the topic of illusion, or not illusion. It's just another concept. What do you know for sure?
You know for sure that the thought arises, but is the message they convey an actual reality?
Can you smell, touch, taste, feel, or see a thought?

Be very precise now. The fact of thoughts arsing is a part of direct experience. The experience of thoughts is here, but do they have any operant power at all?

There is a belief that labels have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’.

But there isn’t. Just like it is a generally accepted belief that labels like ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are inherent
characteristics of ‘things’. But actually, they are not.
When you look at the word label GREEN, what is the actual experience?
Is the colour red ‘experienced’, or is the colour green ‘experienced’ as the label suggests?
Does the label ‘GREEN’ have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’?
Or does the label suggest something else other than what is here now (red colour)?
Is 'green' associated in any way with the experience of the colour red; or is green just a label that overlays the actual experience of red?
If the label ‘GREEN’ is replaced with the label ‘GOOD’ or ‘BAD’, is the redness affected in any way as the labels suggests?

Best,
Adam
Does redness become ‘good’ or ‘bad’, or do the labels have no affect whatsoever on ‘reality’?

[Declan]

Dear Adam,

Thanks for the clarification on thought. It’s something I get confused about.


The word label green (written in red) is just a label as well as the colour red - they’re both labels.

They have no correspondence with reality.

Green is not associated with the colour that I label red, apart from they are both labels.

With good and bad - one looks red and one looks green but these are both labels for what I call colour.

The redness doesn’t become good or bad or anything else. It just is.

Best,

Declan

I’m on vacation for a week now and out of wireless range and trying to have a break from my phone but I’ll check for messages now and again


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NoMansLand]

Hi Declan,
Sorry for the delay.

Is there any conclusion you came to when seeing through the labeling?
Can you see how thoughts keep coming up and labeling experience but they don't actually influence the experience?
Is a label a separate entity that somehow influences the actual direct experience?
What is a label, but just a story about something to use to communicate? Does it have any power at all?

Is there an actual Declan anywhere in your experience?

Direct experience includes the labels - it includes the thoughts arising "that"s red" "that's green" and so on and so forth.
But is it somehow independent of what is occurring?

Here is an exercise which examines the way in which the mind labels experience - it takes about 20 minutes and you will need a pen a paper.

This exercise is broken into 10 minute lots. For each 10 minute period pay attention to any bodily sensation ie is there any tightening, or any relaxing?

For the first ten minutes write down what you are experiencing right now using the word “I”.
For example: I am sitting on a chair, I am hearing a clock ticking, I am looking at a computer screen, I am feeling hungry. Get right to the point, no past or future fantasy, just a plain description of your experience right here and now.

Then for the next ten minutes continue writing down what you are experiencing but this time without using the word “I”. Just describe the experience as it is happening using verbs. For example: sitting on a chair, typing, breathing, blinking, hearing the clock. (Again, watch what is happening in the body.)

At the end of the twenty minutes compare the two ways in which the experience was labelled and answer the following four questions:
1. Is one truer than the other, and If so, which one?
2. What is here without labels?
3. Do labels affect the experience or just describe it?
4. Did you notice any differences in the body?

Best
Adam