Symbols of symbols

[BabyLyon]

LU is focused guiding for seeing there is no real, inherent 'self' - what do you understand by this?
To experientially know without a doubt there is no personal identity, no one to whom things are happening, no one who is the subject of an individual life experience.

What are you looking for at LU?
Looking for clarity of experience and deepening of experience through guidance and community. I'm not sure if I've seen through self which probably means I haven't. I wasn't aware of LU until several months and it keeps coming to my attention so here I am to see what's being offered.

What do you expect from a guided conversation?
I've learned not to expect anything as it's been said, and my experience is, that expectations are premeditated disappointments and/or resentments. I would like to have a clear shift in awareness of what "I" am and a deeper and more clear understanding of what it means to not be personally identified as an individual operating in a world where things happen to "me" often as the result of other seemingly individual people's actions. I've realized a tendency towards defensiveness in the past few years and feel like it would be helpful to have someone to challenge my beliefs and defenses.

What is your experience in terms of spiritual practices, seeking and inquiry?
I had a childhood of very strong conditioning in the Baptist Church and often joke that I am a recovering Baptist. I developed an aversion to the concepts surrounding my religious upbringing as a very young adult and spent many years avoiding all things religious and didn't even know there were other spiritual but non-religious concepts. About 18 years ago I started hearing things that made sense and drew me in to spiritual seeking starting with Eckhart Tolle, Marianne Williamson and all sorts of new-agey things. I have been a student of A Course in Miracles for the past 10 years or so and I like having a sense of devotion to whatever this inexplicable LifeForce Energy that I still like to call God, is. I also have extensive experience with the 12 steps and found it helpful in deconstructing my ideas of "God" and still find the concepts useful in daily life. Although I followed a few teachers that would considered some sort of non-dual, I was not aware of the whole non-dual community until about 3 years ago when I learned of Angelo Dilullo and began following his work primarily. After this, I starting seeing ACIM in a whole different way. I recently attended a live retreat with Angelo and have also being doing some fetter work. Any type of formal meditation practice comes and goes but I practice natural meditation often during daily life. I am a person of natural solitude and am very comfortable with silence. I would also say I do natural inquiry and often inquiry into what is true, what is Reality and other questions as they arise.

On a scale from 1 to 10, how willing are you to question any currently held beliefs about 'self? 10

[ty0]

Heya, Tyler here, welcome to LU. What should I call you?

I'll try to keep this first post short. It is important to recognise the difference between the content of thought and what's actually here, in direct experience (DE). DE is the 5 senses and thought. So, for example, if I asked you what you had for lunch yesterday, you would say "I had xyz for lunch yesterday". But you know that that statement does not describe what is happening. That statement is a thought, communicating to me through thought. There is nothing in DE that tells you you had xyz for lunch yesterday. What there is, is whatever you're experiencing through the 5 senses, as well as a thought that says "I had xyz for lunch yesterday", among many other thoughts.

Suffering happens when we're caught up in the content of thought, believing that whatever our thoughts are describing is actually happening, and not recognising that what's actually happening is the thought about xyz, not xyz itself. Different kinds of thoughts have different degrees of belief in them. We could be discussing vampires and unicorns, and you would never get emotional because you're aware that what we're discussing is wholly hypothetical. What we don't often realise is that every thought, everything we can discuss, is the same as vampires and unicorns.

I'm not sure if I've seen through self which probably means I haven't.

Here's an example of making a conclusion about your circumstances based on the information you have. There is a thought that says "I'm not sure if I've seen through self" and then there is a thought that says "Hm, that probably means I haven't seen through self". But there's no such thing as "seeing through self" in the first place. I mean, of course there is, it's a thought, but is it anything more than a thought? When I say "sensation of right hand", you know exactly what I mean in DE, but when I say "seeing through self", you have to go into abstract concept make-believe land.
'Have I seen through self?' 'What is seeing through self?' 'What is self?' 'Who's the one who could see through self?' 'What's seeing?'
It's all fiction. Recognise thoughts for what they are, thoughts.

To experientially know without a doubt there is no personal identity, no one to whom things are happening, no one who is the subject of an individual life experience.

So now the meat and potatoes. First, what is "to experientially know"? What is knowing? Which is verifiable through DE?:
a) You know something
OR
b) There is a thought that says "you know something"

Who are you? Really, who are you? Can you look at DE now and pinpoint something and say that's you? Where are you?
What about awareness? Lots of gurus like to talk about awareness. What is awareness? Where is it?
What about consciousness? Where/what is that? Is it here?
Is there an experiencer of experience?

[ty0]

That didn't end up being short, my bad hahah

[BabyLyon]

Hello Tyler, you can call me Celine. I was going to say "Welcome inside my head" but it would seem that the idea that thoughts are in this human head is another concept. There is a love for engaging with philosophical concepts and mysterious rabbit holes here but there is also a lot of noticing of thoughts as thoughts which aren't personal and a lot more noticing of direct experience these days. As I prepared my breakfast a few minutes ago, thoughts arose of how I would put the direct experience in to words. There was a sense of overwhelm of how the DE could possibly be expressed in words. There is also a lot of noticing lately that a thought of what I am doing occurs as or after the doing is already being done.

what is "to experientially know"? What is knowing? Which is verifiable through DE?

I don't know what knowing is. My belief is that knowing would be a completely undeniable doubtlessness about the direct experience but I suppose doubt is just another thought. I can doubt the reality of all the thoughts, actions, sensations happening now but the experience of them is undoubtable. There is a seeming experience here. What I find most comforting these days is when it's realized that I don't know anything.

Who are you? Really, who are you? Can you look at DE now and pinpoint something and say that's you? Where are you?

I have no idea who I am. If I am not this body and I am not these thoughts then I must be nothing but yet, it feels like a something. There is experience here of having a body which provides sensory experience and has to be cared for, maintained, like some type of vehicle.

What about awareness? Lots of gurus like to talk about awareness. What is awareness? Where is it?

There seems to be something here that is aware of thoughts, sensations, emotions, experience but the idea that I am awareness doesn't feel accurate.

What about consciousness? Where/what is that? Is it here?

Consciousness is a tricky word as there are many ways that it is used. A lot of gurus and scientists like this word also but mean different things when they use it. It's not a term that I resonate with much outside of the conventional use of a body being conscious (actively aware of its experience) or unconscious (not actively aware of its experience.)

Is there an experiencer of experience?

As above, it seems like there is an awareness of experience but I wouldn't say I am the awareness although there is a sense of having an individuated experience. Hmmm, to be the experiencer of experience is a reference to the past and would seem to be removed from direct experience itself. … the more I write, the more I see thought upon thought upon thought… DE cannot be put into words.

[ty0]

Nice to meet you Celine :)

My belief is that knowing would be a completely undeniable doubtlessness about the direct experience but I suppose doubt is just another thought. I can doubt the reality of all the thoughts, actions, sensations happening now but the experience of them is undoubtable.

So, you have no doubt about DE. And even if there was doubt, would doubt not also be a part of DE?

I have no idea who I am. If I am not this body and I am not these thoughts then I must be nothing but yet, it feels like a something. There is experience here of having a body which provides sensory experience and has to be cared for, maintained, like some type of vehicle.

Let's talk about the body. What is the body? Do you directly experience a "body"? Or is "body" the content of thought? If you close your eyes, you can't see what you would call "your body", there would only be sensations. Do these sensations carry the information of "body"? Or have you learnt to define these sensations as "sensations of your body"? Do these sensations carry any information at all apart from the sensations themselves? Do any of your 5 senses tell you anything? Or are they just what they are?

There seems to be something here that is aware of thoughts, sensations, emotions, experience but the idea that I am awareness doesn't feel accurate.

So you've used the words "there seems to be", does this mean you're not so certain about that something that is aware? You wouldn't say "there seems to be" for sights and sounds, would you? You would just say "there are sights and sounds". When I say "sensation of right hand", you know exactly what in DE I'm referring to, and your attention is pulled there immediately. When I say "awareness", where does attention go? Is there anything at all that that word refers to? Is it possible that there being a subject (awareness) to an object (experience) is just a learned concept?

Even if you could pinpoint something and say "yep that's awareness", what is aware of that? If you can observe what is aware of thoughts, sensations, etc., then is that (what is aware) not also a part of experience, the same as everything else?

As above, it seems like there is an awareness of experience but I wouldn't say I am the awareness although there is a sense of having an individuated experience.

What do you mean by individuated experience? What could be outside of experience? More experience? Other people's experience? Isn't other people's experience just a thought that exists in your experience? Isn't anything you think of that is outside your experience just a thought about something outside your experience, which is within your experience?

And I'm not proposing that there isn't anything outside your experience. If you believed your experience is all there is, or the opposite that there is stuff outside your experience, wouldn't either of these beliefs be within your experience still?

[BabyLyon]

would doubt not also be a part of DE?

Yes, it seems that doubt would also be part of direct experience as a thought arising.

Let's talk about the body. What is the body?

The body is a biological organism capable of sensing and various functions.

Do you directly experience a "body"?

Yes, I can experience a body with the 5 senses. If I look, I can directly see most of a body. If I check my sensory experience, I can feel a vibrational field that corresponds to what I see. It feels like I directly experience a body

Or is "body" the content of thought?

When I look in a mirror I see a body. I suppose the idea that the body is me or belongs to me would be a thought. As I contemplate this, I would have to go outside of direct experience to construct the idea that the body I see is my body or even a complete human body.

If you close your eyes, …Do any of your 5 senses tell you anything? Or are they just what they are?

Sensations are just sensations. The interpretation of the meaning of sensations would be based on past learning/ conditioning/ assumptions.

So you've used the words "there seems to be", does this mean you're not so certain about that something that is aware?

I use the words "seems" and "appears" a lot in daily life. There is very little that can ever be said with certainty. But I suppose it would be more accurate to just say there are sights, sounds, smells etc. There is an interpretation of the senses. This is what seems like an awareness. It seems like something is aware of the DE and capable of interpreting it.

You wouldn't say "there seems to be" for sights and sounds, would you?

Probably not about DE. "seems" would be more appropriate of an interpretation than the DE.

When I say "awareness", where does attention go?

Attention seems to go into a blank space . I guess I do mean awareness as subject of experience.(0bject) Haha! Experiencer/ experiencing/ experienced--all the same. Yes, it must be learned.

Even if you could pinpoint something and say "yep that's awareness"…

Awareness feels very subjective, I don't know how I could pinpoint what feels like awareness.

What do you mean by individuated experience?

It feels like this body/mind unit is having an experience that is separate from other perceived body/minds but I can see that any interpretation of DE as "other" or outside of is a thought. Even to say I look and see a body is an interpretation that what I am seeing is a thing referred to as a body.

Isn't anything you think of that is outside your experience just a thought about something outside your experience, which is within your experience?

Yes. I see that.

And I'm not proposing that there isn't anything outside your experience. If you believed your experience is all there is, or the opposite that there is stuff outside your experience, wouldn't either of these beliefs be within your experience still?

Yes. This occurred to me as I first read something this morning. The seeing is the direct experience. Everything else is interpretation-that there are symbols called letters that make words and then meaning ascribed to words. There is so much interpretation ascribed to sensory data!

[ty0]

It feels like this body/mind unit is having an experience that is separate from other perceived body/minds but I can see that any interpretation of DE as "other" or outside of is a thought. Even to say I look and see a body is an interpretation that what I am seeing is a thing referred to as a body.

The body is a biological organism capable of sensing and various functions.

Yes, when asked what is the body, you gave a definition more thought. When asked what the body is in DE, you told me about DE, but you recognise that there is no information about "body" in DE, it's only an idea.

Similarly, what is an apple? If you look at an apple, is there an apple there? Is "apple" in direct experience?

If I check my sensory experience, I can feel a vibrational field that corresponds to what I see.

Does it correspond? Do you know it corresponds through DE or through the content of thought?

This is what seems like an awareness. It seems like something is aware of the DE and capable of interpreting it.

Why does it seem like something is aware of the DE? What information are you using to deduce this? If there is nothing you can observe that you would call awareness, how does it seem like something is aware? And if you use logic to conclude that there must be awareness, is this not just more thought?

Awareness feels very subjective, I don't know how I could pinpoint what feels like awareness.

What is "subjective"? Is subject not just a thought? A thought in experience, making it as "object" as anything else? And if there is anything you would call awareness in experience, what is aware of that awareness?

It feels like this body/mind unit is having an experience that is separate from other perceived body/minds

What do you mean "it feels like this body/mind unit...."? What does it "feel like"? Does it feel like anything? Is this another word for "think"?

It seems like something is aware of the DE and capable of interpreting it.

Do you choose to interpret DE? Do the labels and interpretations not arise out automatically? Although you can observe interpretations, can you observe the act of interpreting, or the interpreter?

[BabyLyon]

DE, but you recognise that there is no information about "body" in DE, it's only an idea. Similarly, what is an apple? If you look at an apple, is there an apple there? Is "apple" in direct experience?

Yes, this is true. The difference in experience here is that I don't personally identify with an apple. If I smash the apple, it doesn’t hurt. There is no attachment to what happens to the apple.

What do you mean "it feels like this body/mind unit...."?

While I don't experience that I AM a body, I do experience being attached to a specific body/ sensory organism/ meatsuit/ whatever in which thoughts, feelings and sensations arise and there is a sense of identity with the body as if it represents who/ what I am

What does it "feel like"? Does it feel like anything? Is this another word for "think"?

It could be, I have heard it said that adding thought to sensation = feeling. This makes sense.

Does it correspond? Do you know it corresponds through DE or through the content of thought?

Upon investigation, it does seem to be through content of thought. I can't really tell where it is or where it stops but it somehow seems localized.

Why does it seem like something is aware of the DE? What information are you using to deduce this? If there is nothing you can observe that you would call awareness, how does it seem like something is aware? And if you use logic to conclude that there must be awareness, is this not just more thought?

. I think it's a self reflective sense which would be thought. Yep, awareness seems to be self reflective thought.

What is "subjective"? Is subject not just a thought? A thought in experience, making it as "object" as anything else? And if there is anything you would call awareness in experience, what is aware of that awareness?

The subjective sense relates to the answer above about the difference between a body I experience being identified with and an apple. The body is always "here" and apple can be anywhere. I'm sure this is all thought but I'll need to think about it some more. ;)

Do you choose to interpret DE? Do the labels and interpretations not arise out automatically?

I don't know!

Although you can observe interpretations, can you observe the act of interpreting, or the interpreter?

I cannot observe the act of interpreting or the interpreter.

Thanks so much for your time and persistence Tyler! It's greatly appreciated!!

[BabyLyon]

Re: “my body”

I am seeing much more this morning how it takes thought to create identification with the body. When the body first awakens in the morning, there are sensations then thoughts arise which create the sense of it being personal.

[BabyLyon]

Do you choose to interpret DE?

Of course not. Interpretation arises as thought.

[BabyLyon]

Hey Ty,
Just checking in. I’ve been reading the book Liberation Unleashed and just did the first step exercise. So far nothing that feels like fear here. If anything the statement deeply resonates and has for quite awhile. There is a bit of an excited feeling as evidenced by some buzzy/ fluttery sensations in the chest and head. I’m just going to sit with this a bit and see what else, if anything, comes up.

[ty0]

Hey Celine,

Re: “my body”

I am seeing much more this morning how it takes thought to create identification with the body. When the body first awakens in the morning, there are sensations then thoughts arise which create the sense of it being personal.

Yep. When waking up, there are only sensations. Then the thoughts come and claim "Yep, that's my body". Close your eyes so you can't see what you would label as your body. Feel into the sensations. How far away is the sensation of your right hand from the sensation of your left hand? How far away is the sensation of your right hand from the sensation of your right foot? Normally, you would imagine that your foot is much further than your other hand, but when you inspect the sensations closely, are they not all equally "here"? Are they even in different locations at all? Do the sensations carry any information about a "body"?

While I don't experience that I AM a body, I do experience being attached to a specific body/ sensory organism/ meatsuit/ whatever in which thoughts, feelings and sensations arise and there is a sense of identity with the body as if it represents who/ what I am

But where do thoughts and feelings arise? Is there any localised place where these things arise? With the sensation exploration earlier, you must have seen that sensations arise "here". And does everything else not also arise "here"? If everything arises "here", where is "there"? Is there even a "there"? Look at something near and then look at something far. Is the object further away more "there" than the nearer object which is "here"? Even if so, don't the ideas of "here" and "there" both arise equally "here" as anything else? Where else could the ideas "here" and "there" be? If the body is here and the apple is there, aren't both thoughts of the body being here and the apple being there both "here"?

Is there truly a "there"? And if you find a "there", do you not observe it "here"?

[BabyLyon]

Hi Tyler,
I’m spending some time exploring the senses and how much thought, often very subtly, is arising and adding a story to what is being experienced. I’m noticing thought is what gives the sense of I to the body. There’s no sense of I until a thought arises that says this is me, my body, my actions etc. Thought makes things feel personal.

Thanks,
🦁

[BabyLyon]

Hi Tyler,

Normally, you would imagine that your foot is much further than your other hand, but when you inspect the sensations closely, are they not all equally "here"? Are they even in different locations at all? Do the sensations carry any information about a "body"?

The sensations are equally here, it requires thought to imagine the location of the sensations as being.

But where do thoughts and feelings arise?

There is no localized place other than here. I've been closely noticing how seeing, hearing, etc can only be happening here. How strange it is that it seems like we are seeing or hearing something "over there" but it's all here. Weird. Everything in experience is just here. I've been noticing how much subtle thought there is which lends to the experience of there being someone who is experiencing. When I really look, there is only direct experience. Everything else is interpretation which leads to stories about what is happening.

Thanks,
C

[ty0]

Wonderful. "Here" and "there" are just ideas, in DE there is neither here nor there, only DE. What about right and wrong then? What about true and false?