Hi Bill
I just want to remind you in case you missed this:
For the sake of the intensity of the inquiry let’s try to stick to a daily conversation. Of course, life happens, so if you need more time, please let me know. I will do as well.
It would be nice if we can create a bit of momentum…
Exactly. Some trepidation is still there, but it's silly.
What we’ll see soon is that fear is just a sensation with a thought. Fear has a purpose – to protect old ways, conditioning, beliefs, hopes- the survival of the imaginary self. So, obviously when threatened there will be fear involved. But once it is seen that there is nothing that needs protection, it falls away. How we deal with fear initially, is to acknowledge it, thank it for doing its job, allow it to be there, don’t fight it.
Then you look carefully what it is protecting and ask yourself if this protection is really necessary...
Dennett calls the self a narrative center of gravity. Like the mass center of gravity, it greatly simplifies operations. You can't go mechanics without the mass center of gravity and you can't function in society without our self narrative center of gravity. But they're both entirely abstract. There's no self anywhere you look. I've also read it compared to a university, a collection of things, none of which is the university itself.
Here we see for ourselves and we don’t rely on other’s experiences and observations. That is why I asked you to leave spiritual teachings, philosophies and science away during the inquiry. If you have a meditation practice, please feel free to continue with it as usual – it might come helpful.
Where do I need to look. Certainly I've given it a lot of thought. But thoughts are themselves insubstantial. You can think yourself into anything you like. What do you recommend?
Indeed! Thoughts are not where we look for answers…
Let’s just make sure that you understand how to LOOK for no self in the exercises:
Looking is a matter of noticing what is already here, not inventing, remembering or imagining something. If I asked you to tell me what is behind your back right now, you could answer by doing one of two things: by thinking and remembering, or by turning your head around and actually looking back and describing what you see. If I ask you to look for your phone or keys, you would quite naturally, take a look and locate them. That’s how to look.
Looking is finding out what is true in experience. It is a nonverbal action of focusing attention on a target. Thinking is verbal—it is naming experience. Both work together as one mechanism. If you can’t see for yourself, you cannot describe it in your own words (but you can attempt to describe it using someone else’s words, from memory).
So there is a BIG difference between knowing that there is nothing and seeing that there is nothing.
Here is another example to illustrate the difference:
If I ask you what colour socks you are wearing right now you have two ways to answer:
1. You can think about it, trying to remember, or guessing what colour they are.
2. You can have a look at your socks and see what colour they ACTUALLY are!
You will agree that only by looking you could be 100% certain,
right?
For the purpose of this inquiry, it is crucial that you are clear about this difference in the two ways of answering and stick only to the second way. We are only interested in looking at and seeing what is actually going on. We are only interested in Direct (Actual) Experience (DE/AE)- the experience right now and right here.
Direct or Actual Experience is:
Seeing
Hearing
Feeling (not emotion - emotion is sensation plus thoughts/labels)
Tasting
Smelling
Thoughts Arising (but not their content, what the thought is ABOUT)
Please let me know if you are clear about this or if you would like any further clarification.
Here's an exercise for you to get super clear on what direct experience is. You can use this photo of an apple or a real apple.
Have a look at an apple. When ‘looking at an apple’, there's colour, a thought saying ‘apple,' and maybe a thought saying, "I'm looking at an apple." What about the content of thoughts, what they describe? While these thoughts are known, what they talk ABOUT cannot be found in direct or actual experience. Direct, actual experience is sound, thought, colour(sight), smell, taste and sensation.
Taste labelled ‘apple’ is known
Colour (visual information) labelled ‘apple’ is known
Sensation labelled ‘apple’ is known (when apple is touched)
Smell labelled ‘apple’ is known
Thought about/of an ‘apple’ is known
However, is 'an apple' actually known? (Or is it just a label?) Is there really an ‘apple’ here, or only colour and a thought ABOUT ‘apple’? Can ‘apple’ be found in actual experience?
Love
Rali