Sugarcoat

🤫🤫

Omg 😂😂

if I try to remember how it is when I dream id say Im not aware of myself as the dreamer, there's only the dream but I can dream of myself from different pov . So my sense of self being in the dream although yea it's all one substance. you mean nothing exists outside perception? i don't see how this leaves no room for a sense of self behind those eyes. but that is fine mm that is how I interpret it too. not a bunch of stages. makes sense i imagine myself all the time equally as much as before, but when the self is attached to your mind, this mental self, it seems to be able to keep things blocked or something idk He has these non dual meetings. I looked yesterday and happened to hear him say "first appears a contraction then the self arises out of that" . What exactly that contraction would be idk , im guessing it's not physical in the sense of physical sensation you talk about. He is also the type that says it's a completely hopeless situation for the self there's nothing one can do to get rid of that illusion. Not that I know but from all ive heard which isn't that much the way he describes makes most sense to me... yea it might be just imagined I don't know but its hard to pin point or see that, doesn't seem like it thats great

i see

Hell happens on this earth already look what happens to people both believers and non believers.

@Salvijus yea but still infinite difference between even the thinnest self and no self. I was wondering where you base that on because I know plenty examples of enlightenment people for example just any non dual talker on YouTube they say it’s all normal after so

@Salvijus have you been without a self to notice this?

say it when it happens

obv not true since we have things like torture happen

Yea there’s nuances take care✌🏻

I mean the brain as the basis for the most basic things how inward outward you are, some things, something like that

Im still saying the brain is the basis for this inward/outwardness …

Personality is a mix still of brain and conditioning isn’t it im not here to argue btw just writing for no reason really

But you being affected by societies conditioning so deeply is becuase you have a brain that is more or less focused outward so focused on the world but it’s the norm so it’s not really recognized

Mm I see. You can have your attention on certain specific things this and that. I usually think in terms of the most basic level as a kind of foundation. So basically how outward vs inward you are which I see mostly as a consequence of how your brain is but it could perhaps change for some people idk for me it has been the same all my life . So the more inward the more attention on yourself and inside world and the more outward the more on outside world and then the other stuff like your desires etc reflect this basic level. But ofc there’s more nuances to this but

But I’m not “holding” my attention there, as in I’m doing it actively. It just rests there naturally by default , why? Because I’m built that way. Then all my interest and value and desire and all come from this. It’s not like “I have desire for this so let me hold my attention here” the attention rested there prior since childhood as far back as I can remember maybe it’s different for you tho can’t know. More nuances for you maybe

I know I didn’t answer very much pertaining to what u wrote specifically. In regards to your first question : no, that is hard 2nd and 3rd: you wouldn’t. For the things you do have desire for, you don’t need to “hold” the attention there actively it just effortlessly goes there, isn’t it? Why? Did you chose how it naturally goes? Isn’t it just how you function naturally that dictates that aka your neurology? it is my experience. In the way that I have a certain way my attention rests naturally, because my brain just is that way .Then I can chose where to direct it to other places by effort but where it rests naturally is where all my desires are related to

I just say your neurology is the basis for how your attention is by default without you trying and desires just reflect this In my experience

@Salvijus isn’t it the opposite attention first then desire comes second so your brain the way it’s built determines how your attention is divided , so if you are more outward , you have that kind of brain, meaning more of your attention out on the world then your desires will reflect it you’ll be the type of person who is more dependent on for example others for your happiness then the opposite if your brain is built in more inward way meaning more attention on yourself then you’ll have more desires connected to that so you’ll be more likely to want your ideal self for example so it’s like we have a default in how our attention is divided we can’t control

I would say yes. Dreams contain me. Can be first pov or third no they seem enmeshed because attention is not a thing its just the sense of me being separate that makes it a useful concept maybe there is not. But it just seems like it that's cool how that happened to you. I believe it might affect how different people without a self talk about the self. If for someone it just drops randomly then maybe their understanding of the self will be whatever they had prior to that. But if you go through a long process off shedding all the layers you understand it differently in my experience the reason for all my shedding of layers boils down to attention on the self, then self-inquiry has came naturally but not extensively, but no I haven't had that singular drop you seem to refer to. Although I did completely detach from my mental self. And maybe there are different levels of "no self" too. For me the most extreme seems like someone like Jim Newman for example. I asked one enlightened person online about physical pain, they said "it's a sensation like any other, there is no rejection of it, desire for it to go away, no discrimination against it". That's another example of the deepest level, its to me is like walking dead. So wherever you are maybe is like a level above. Then where I am would be one level above that. Then the average human one level above me, I don't know tho. Its hard for me to pinpoint sometimes "am I like this person but it just expresses itself differently because of brain difference" I feel like this is possible as long as there is any sense of a you as the body. when I had a fixed mental self, for example I remember I had this mental identity of myself as being socially awkward, then this could happen in regards to that. altough there was a period after my dissolution of the mental self which I could still experience this fear, like there was residues of those old identity patterns. but the way it expressed itself was radically different, it was like directly in the body, and was quickly dissolved because no fixed mind was blocking it kind of. basically what you describe sounds to me more typical to how it is when one has a fixed mental self. Now when I have dissolved that fixed mental self, but I still sense myself as this body, above scenarios can happen to me still in regards to physical pain.. which it does... can't see how it wouldn't unless you reach the walking dead level like Jim Newman and such maybe it would express itself differently for you tho, hard for me to even define "your" level. I mean seeming to be here as located in my skull i find what Jim Newman says about how the self is this physical tension in the body that creates the sense of im here and then the belief of that. I think it's quite accurate description where im at. It seems to me different than saying it's imagined. what you say as this imagined entity sounds to me like the fixed mental self which I have dissolved fully already. I dont know for sure tho if youre referring to that. I can imagine myself in my mind still tho. I wouldn't say the sense of me located in my skull is imagined in that same regard. If it were, couldn't I see how its imagined in the same way I could see my mental self and dissolve that, hmm.... okay i understand what youre saying here and I would agree the only thing I would question is that last part where you say once you stop imagining, yourself , the self stops appearing. idk about that one. I know ive said this before. I still feel like it's more that I experience myself as in the body, and believe im here, and this is what makes it possible for me to imagine myself and believe it represents me. . So me being in the body the basis, not the thought. I could investigate this more ofc but by now I feel its more accurate to my experience . did you come to that conclusion by not thinking for long enough then you "dropped" permanently? or

That's the thing, I never manage to pin point myself as some fixed entity or define myself exactly. Im not any sense perception. But somehow I can still "sense" myself. When im thinking, wether auditory or images of my body, I sense myself in it. Yet at the same time I sense myself like I am behind my eyes watching my thoughts. So there being like a division. Ive thought about it beforehow I kinda feel like im both the one who has their attention on themselves, yet simultaneously my sense of self is the object of this attention. But I can't identity one entity . that does make sense. Attention for me seems to require a sense of self, so I am paying attention to something, could be myself When your sense of self disappeared, did you prior to that, go through a gradual process of dissolution, where layer by layer dissolved all the way to zero, or did it just drop one day without going through that entire process? i have noticed in my experience how my mind constructs my sense of time and how my mental self was related to it too. don't know if that's all there is to it though. I can't still wrap my head around that it's all just imagination. How come I seem to be entangled with this imagination? and affected by it. That is also my imagination saying that (which im entangled with) so it's like a loop. I still can't tell if that's all there is to this self tho. yea once again I cannot define myself and say what I am. So I can't identify some fixed entity located somewhere. I can't place my attention on it like an object in my experience. I notice how my mind is always referring to me or imagining me. So its like it is pointing to a me here, but simultaneously I am the thinker, and this is almost constant so it does maybe make a bit of sense in how it could be thought based, imaginary. I feel like im very open minded and can understand concepts well but that it could penetrate this seemingly constant sense of me is mind blowing to me the belief thing to me is still puzzling. I can be open to the idea that there can't be an actual self, and I can understand it conceptually perhaps, but it doesn't seem to me that I believe I exist, I just "seem" to be here, if that makes sense. yea I can see, this does apply to my experience somehow . But still it just "seems" like I can imagine myself, even if it might not be actually true, not that it seems that I am the literal thought tho. Do I believe that I can imagine myself? is that the cause for this ability, and thus it creates this sense of self? that is still what puzzles me, this belief thing, how could I realize that I can't imagine myself? I would have to see that I don't exist at all, it would have to drop, Yet if this self is the very imagination, then the imagination would have to drop, but then if I start to think again after a while suddenly im imagining myself again, and come back to existence, so I would have to see how I can't imagine myself, thats what it boils down to. kind of what you're saying ? it is something else........

Yea I agree that the only way to perceive yourself in the past is through imagination in the present. I meant that it is the sense of separate self in the body that is the basis, that makes it possible for me to imagine myself in the past or future, my sense of self projected into thoughts. Not that there is two me, but my attention can be absorbed into thoughts of me in past or future, but it all depends on the sense of me in the body. So if that would drop, then maybe I can imagine "me" in time but there's no sense of me in the thought. Maybe that's how it is for you? you can imagine exactly what I can but just no sense of you in it. you say "belief" a lot when it comes to the self. But where does that belief come from? Some speak as if we are taught that we are someone. Like our identity is created because we are referred to by our parents and are taught duality. But isn't that secondary, like at the core, is this sense of separation and the sense of im separate, which is just this sense that appears, and the belief and all else comes from that? im not sure but lets say I was born isolated from society and language, I can't know this, but im guessing id still feel like this being behind the eyes and maybe id be able to imagine my body and voice and sense myself in those thoughts, not that it matters for my situation but just to make it clear what I mean by it seeming like this sense of separation just appears and then belief and all else comes secondary I can't define myself without thinking no that's right. And most of my thoughts are of me in past or future yea. I can't really say what I am. It is hard to pin point, I can sense myself, so for example as im writing this I can almost sense myself in the voice in my mind that is reading this. My mind will say, it seems like I am here somehow behind the eyes. but where does that ability come from? isn't it possible for me to imagine myself precisely because I sense myself in this body, like I said before mm ive had a lot of loosening myself, and like layers peeling, done some meditation too so I can see its potential role. Never has the "whole thing" dropped tho. this ties back to my point about belief not that I need to, but that it seems like the almost constant frequency of thoughts are because there is a sense of self because a lot of thoughts are fear based or related to a kind of unease in my experience, which all relates to the self, without the self im guessing less thoughts appear? that is hard to say but id say like before, it seems like this appearance of being located behind the eyes separate im open to this. Im really going through it so that's one reason for me looking into this

I think I get what you’re saying. Although I would say that the state I’m in when I don’t think for a brief moment is not non dual in the way it would be if my sense of self was gone. Like I’m guessing it is for you. Not that you said that exactly but something along those lines. Because in order for me to stop thinking requires a certain effort, even if it’s subtle, like placing my attention on sensory perception . It’s still experienced for me like an action I’m doing, directing my attention. I am involved in that as much as I’m involved in the incessant stream of thoughts. One could say that is my mind that is saying that, creating a dual description again, yes it is. But the mind isn’t just describing for nothing. I would say that the constant stream of thoughts is there because there is a sense of self, not the reverse, that the thoughts are giving rise to the sense of self i can for example visualize an imagine of me in my past, and there is a sense of me in that imagine. I wouldn’t say the image created that sense of self, but the opposite , my sense of self is simply being projected into that imagine, so it’s already here regardless if I’m thinking or not. Same with auditory thoughts of my voice. What is left over when I stop thinking? I’d say I’m still here. The thoughts are engaging me, not creating me. So I’d say the self is prior to thoughts. Like this appearance of separation that arises in children . This is my mind saying that, yes, but it’s still not for nothing it’s saying it. All these imaginary dualities are possible because of this one duality appearance of the self that appears in humans, I’d say if it were just about the mind, it would seem to me easier to break through the self. Like if you just stop thinking for long enough somehow it would be clear you’re not there. But why would the thoughts keep coming back constantly? Because there is still a sense of self here to engage. I can’t say I know this. But it just seems to me we’re dealing with something prior to the mind when it comes to this self.

So what you’re kind of saying is, if I for example just stare blankly, so there is no thought for a brief moment (hard for me to sustain for longer), or in the gap between thoughts, then it’s just this one experience , its when the mind starts to thinks, about me for example, it’s how the sense of I is created. And since the stream of thoughts is pretty much constant, it seems like there is always a self there, being pointed to. Something like that?

Imagination is for me thoughts in minds eye and then projections of that . Idk it just seems to me the self is not purely that, not that it’s an actual thing but that the sense of being a self doesn’t depend on the mind so the mind can be silent and all the layers of mental self can dissolve yet it still seems I’m here somehow and can’t be shook