I keep on thinking I'm the Brain

[Winny]

13 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Try this next time you sit down for 25 mins: Take your finger and try to point to yourself. Notice carefully what the finger it pointing at. Try to clarify what that thing is. Notice, the finger never points at a brain. What is seeing the finger?

I will definitely do that.

13 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Clearly, thoughts come and go

Yes, I realize that I'm not my thoughts and the fact that I said at the beginning that I'm my brain...I'm starting to notice that that is not true because it is really irrelevant whether the brain exists or not, what is TRUE is RIGHT NOW. My direct experience. 

13 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

What is essentially you?

It is the awareness of everything in my direct experience, but I still need to do more of self inquiry. However, I can say that I'm on the right track (I think) because even right now when I write I...I'm like who is this I ur talking about???

Yesterday, I was with my grandparents at dinner and I was just literally enjoying observing the present and I just realizing that whatever I thought who I was, was just wrong  

I got another question though...what about reactions and actions I take? I mean...I'm aware of them, but who's controlling them? Like I know that they arrive kind of out nowhere, but what is this nowhere? Also, when I (who the f*** am I talking about right now when I say I? :D) access my memory..I can do that. Who is doing that? The emptiness? No, because even right now I'm just aware of what I'm writing and not really doing it...what the fuck? O_o

[Leo Gura]

3 minutes ago, Winny said:

Yes, I realize that I'm not my thoughts

Good, but do you realize that the brain is a thought?

That's a tricky one to swallow. Try it.

[Leo Gura]

6 minutes ago, Winny said:

but who's controlling them?

Notice that science never tells you who's in control. So it's not like this question has ever been answered by mankind.

What if no one is in control? After all, who controls the rain?

[abrakamowse]

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Notice that science never tells you who's in control. So it's not like this question has ever been answered by mankind.

They keep avoiding the investigation because they consider that consciousness appears magically from matter. They think matter has no consciousness, is not "alive" by their definition.

But they know that they are giving matter attributes of "God" because if matter is previous to consciousness then matter created everything and it must be infinite, not created, it must have attributes that only "THAT" which they won't accept as primary must have.

Not sure if I am explaining clearly, but that's how I see it. Otherwise they will be always in the trap of which one was first, the egg or the chicken?

 

Edited June 26, 2020 by abrakamowse

[Winny]

6 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

the brain is a thought

as in like a made up concept of mankind? or what do you mean? 

6 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

What if no one is in control?

So, basically, everything "I" do just happens. In this case, the I is the ego, but the true I is actually the awareness that is always present. So, this ego I, is made up of stories that defines "Winny", but Winny is not I, but rather a character that is made up, right? 

What about emotions? How are emotions there if in reality, I am mere awareness? 

Also, pain...as already mentioned, I had an accident 5 years ago and there's pain in "my" right side of the head. This "my" is targeted at Winny. "I" did an MRI scan and it showed that the nerves have been affected. Now, since there might not even be a brain, are nerves even true then? and if not, what is causing the pain?

This ultimately means (or doesn't mean) that nothing actually matters because mere awareness doesn't have any desires. However, we live in a world where money is needed and therefore, the ego, which the awareness is not in control of, does its thing to get it? So, this then involves getting good habits in place or eliminating bad habits, knowing when it functions best, etc. Is this correct to assume it that way?

[Carl-Richard]

2 hours ago, Winny said:

as in like a made up concept of mankind? or what do you mean? 

It's a made up concept of mankind that arises in the form of a thought. Ask yourself: how do you know what a brain is? "Well, science says the brain is a collection of neurons that are interconnected in a network, and it looks like this". Now, notice how that is a thought. Let's say that you were looking at "the brain" for the first time and you didn't know what it was. In that instance, you have no thoughts that could point you towards what you now consider to be a brain. Once somebody teaches you their idea of what a brain is, you then project these ideas and beliefs onto what you're actually looking at in the form of a thought (oh, that is a brain). So what you consider to be the brain is nothing but a thought.

 

2 hours ago, Winny said:

So, basically, everything "I" do just happens. In this case, the I is the ego, but the true I is actually the awareness that is always present. So, this ego I, is made up of stories that defines "Winny", but Winny is not I, but rather a character that is made up, right? 

Sounds about right.

 

2 hours ago, Winny said:

What about emotions? How are emotions there if in reality, I am mere awareness? 

Emotions arise and dissipate within awareness. Thoughts also arise and dissipate in awareness. They're not essential to you.

 

2 hours ago, Winny said:

Also, pain...as already mentioned, I had an accident 5 years ago and there's pain in "my" right side of the head. This "my" is targeted at Winny. "I" did an MRI scan and it showed that the nerves have been affected. Now, since there might not even be a brain, are nerves even true then? and if not, what is causing the pain?

Let's take a similar approach to the idea that the brain is a thought. When you look at the MRI scan results and you see damaged nerves, is that information self-evident or does it come in form of a thought? If yes, then whatever cause you're attributing to the pain is arising in the form of a thought. Now, if what you're looking at is not really an MRI scan of your nerves (that would be a thought), then what are you actually looking at? Well, you're simply looking at your own experience; consciousness. This consciousness has no true cause. It's essentially creating itself. Is that a satisfying answer for an intellectually stimulated brain? No , but we're trying to go beyond your intellect and into awareness. It's a good thing to get used to aswell: your intellect will never really be satisfied.

 

2 hours ago, Winny said:

This ultimately means (or doesn't mean) that nothing actually matters because mere awareness doesn't have any desires. However, we live in a world where money is needed and therefore, the ego, which the awareness is not in control of, does its thing to get it? So, this then involves getting good habits in place or eliminating bad habits, knowing when it functions best, etc. Is this correct to assume it that way?

Anything only matters relative to one's survival, and the ego will do whatever it needs in order to survive, which includes everything you mentioned. At the bottom of this though, the question is: do you care more about truth than your own survival? Right now it might seem like both are intertwined, but they're actually strongly opposed to each other.

Edited June 26, 2020 by Carl-Richard

[abrakamowse]

How the mind trick us...

 

 

and an article: "Does the Mind Create the Brain or Does the Brain Create Mind?"

https://www.choprafoundation.org/consciousness/does-the-mind-create-the-brain-or-does-the-brain-create-mind/

Edited June 27, 2020 by abrakamowse

[Leo Gura]

10 hours ago, Winny said:

as in like a made up concept of mankind? or what do you mean?

You have to clarify in your experience what "a brain" is. What does the phrase "a brain" or "my brain" actually refer to in your direct experience? For example, the phrase "Santa Claus" refers to an image of a fat bearded guy in a red costume in your mind. How about "the brain"? You'll have to be very careful here not to get lost in layer upon layer of concept.

If you think "my brain" refers to an actual physical object in your skull, think again! That is NOT true in your direct experience. That is a conceptual fabrication because there is no physical brain present in your direct experience. If you're honest, you've probably never seen a brain in your entire life. Which obviously means your entire notion of brains is imaginary.

Now, of course, this is where your mind will get extra tricky. It will say, "Okay, but if we cut open my skull there is guaranteed to be a brain in there!" But now you need to carefully notice that this too is imaginary! You are imagining your skull cut open. This is not real in your direct experience. Now you will say, "But what if it becomes real?!" << But that too is imagination! The entire notion of a future is imaginary!

You see, imagination works in multiple interwoven layers in order to create a sense of objective reality which isn't really there other than in your mind. If your mind stopped working, objective reality would disappear.

Don't take my word for it. Take a look at it. Is there anything about reality which is objective outside your imagining that it is? How is it possible that you have ever accessed anything objective at all when 100% of your experience of life has been subjective???!!!

Notice that objectivity is just subjectivity denied.

Fun stuff, eh?

[Winny]

14 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

It's a made up concept of mankind that arises in the form of a thought. Ask yourself: how do you know what a brain is? "Well, science says the brain is a collection of neurons that are interconnected in a network, and it looks like this". Now, notice how that is a thought. Let's say that you were looking at "the brain" for the first time and you didn't know what it was. In that instance, you have no thoughts that could point you towards what you now consider to be a brain. Once somebody teaches you their idea of what a brain is, you then project these ideas and beliefs onto what you're actually looking at in the form of a thought (oh, that is a brain). So what you consider to be the brain is nothing but a thought.

Ha, interesting. So, humans just observed the "brain" and gave it a label. But doesn't that apply to everything else that "we" have? Like "arm" "legs" "head" etc etc. I guess this is because the Ego needs to have a meaning. Even if it is just a thought, how did they invent a device that was able to detect the activities within "the brain"? So, all of the parts of the "brain" is just a mere label? So, is then the amgydala for instance, really responsible for emotions and the hippocampus for memory?

14 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Let's take a similar approach to the idea that the brain is a thought. When you look at the MRI scan results and you see damaged nerves, is that information self-evident or does it come in form of a thought? If yes, then whatever cause you're attributing to the pain is arising in the form of a thought. Now, if what you're looking at is not really an MRI scan of your nerves (that would be a thought), then what are you actually looking at? Well, you're simply looking at your own experience; consciousness. This consciousness has no true cause. It's essentially creating itself. Is that a satisfying answer for an intellectually stimulated brain? No , but we're trying to go beyond your intellect and into awareness. It's a good thing to get used to aswell: your intellect will never really be satisfied.

Ok, I get that, but how is the pain caused then? My right side of the neck is also more swollen, so what happened there if the nerves or spine didn't move? the consciousness? 

 

14 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Anything only matters relative to one's survival, and the ego will do whatever it needs in order to survive, which includes everything you mentioned. At the bottom of this though, the question is: do you care more about truth than your own survival? Right now it might seem like both are intertwined, but they're actually strongly opposed to each other.

True. 

[Winny]

7 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

You have to clarify in your experience what "a brain" is. What does the phrase "a brain" or "my brain" actually refer to in your direct experience? For example, the phrase "Santa Claus" refers to an image of a fat bearded guy in a red costume in your mind. How about "the brain"? You'll have to be very careful here not to get lost in layer upon layer of concept.

If you think "my brain" refers to an actual physical object in your skull, think again! That is NOT true in your direct experience. That is a conceptual fabrication because there is no physical brain present in your direct experience. If you're honest, you've probably never seen a brain in your entire life. Which obviously means your entire notion of brains is imaginary.

Now, of course, this is where your mind will get extra tricky. It will say, "Okay, but if we cut open my skull there is guaranteed to be a brain in there!" But now you need to carefully notice that this too is imaginary! You are imagining your skull cut open. This is not real in your direct experience. Now you will say, "But what if it becomes real?!" << But that too is imagination! The entire notion of a future is imaginary!

You see, imagination works in multiple interwoven layers in order to create a sense of objective reality which isn't really there other than in your mind. If your mind stopped working, objective reality would disappear.

Don't take my word for it. Take a look at it. Is there anything about reality which is objective outside your imagining that it is? How is it possible that you have ever accessed anything objective at all when 100% of your experience of life has been subjective???!!!

Notice that objectivity is just subjectivity denied.

Fun stuff, eh?

Interesting stuff indeed. One key word that I really took away from my confusion, questions and answers is direct experience. 

The question then arises..

1. what is really in our skull? 

2. how does law of attraction then work because that's the work of the ego's thought..

3. coming back to my accident, how is the pain caused when there's no brain? because since that accident the pain is in my head, upper back and my right leg goes a bit numb from time to time. 

 

[Leo Gura]

12 minutes ago, Winny said:

Interesting stuff indeed. One key word that I really took away from my confusion, questions and answers is direct experience.

Good. Progress.

Quote

The question then arises..

1. what is really in our skull? 

"Skull" is no different than "brain". There is no skull in your direct experience. Your skull is imagined right now.

Quote

2. how does law of attraction then work because that's the work of the ego's thought..

3. coming back to my accident, how is the pain caused when there's no brain? because since that accident the pain is in my head, upper back and my right leg goes a bit numb from time to time.

These are complicated conceptual questions. Don't worry about that for now. You can explore those questions in a few months -- assuming they still remain -- once you've done some serious inquiry grounded in direct experience.

The short answer is: everything is self-caused. The brain doesn't cause pain. Pain causes pain. Pain IS pain. Everything is itself. That's it. A = A.

[Winny]

14 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

"Skull" is no different than "brain". There is no skull in your direct experience. Your skull is imagined right now.

Ok, true, at this VERY MOMENT, there is no skull. When I touch my head, what is that? How am I supposed to describe that? 

16 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The short answer is: everything is self-caused. The brain doesn't cause pain. Pain causes pain. Pain IS pain. Everything is itself. That's it. A = A.

Yes, I mean that pain is caused by a bar (while doing squats) on my neck and while I was going up it moved something at my neck and since then I have this pain, hence me going to physio therapy, but until now no luck

Anyway, the reason why I'm telling you that is because the ego obviously wants it to be healed and obviously nobody can say if it will, but "I" have faith. However, if it is self caused and pain is pain, this pain on my neck caused the numbness in my right leg too, so somehow it is connected. By what? consciousness? Measurements such as physio therapy, what are they doing? Moving my consciousness to the right place again? 

[Leo Gura]

13 minutes ago, Winny said:

Ok, true, at this VERY MOMENT, there is no skull. When I touch my head, what is that? How am I supposed to describe that? 

It certainly isn't a skull. It's a collection of sensations overlaid with thoughts and imagination.

Quote

Yes, I mean that pain is caused by a bar (while doing squats) on my neck and while I was going up it moved something at my neck and since then I have this pain, hence me going to physio therapy, but until now no luck

Anyway, the reason why I'm telling you that is because the ego obviously wants it to be healed and obviously nobody can say if it will, but "I" have faith. However, if it is self caused and pain is pain, this pain on my neck caused the numbness in my right leg too, so somehow it is connected. By what? consciousness? Measurements such as physio therapy, what are they doing? Moving my consciousness to the right place again? 

There is only a field of sensations and whatever causal explanations you're holding in your mind are drawing relationships between these various sensations, trying to make sense of them. Your mind can draw an infinite number of causal relationships between an infinite number of different sensations.

E.g., you get an itch on your ass and you connect it in your mind with an image of a mosquito. You are connecting sensations with other sensations and those connections are themselves sensations.

You've got nothing but sensations of various qualities.

[Winny]

7 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

It certainly isn't a skull. It's a collection of sensations overlaid with thoughts and imagination.

Ok, makes sense. 

13 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

There is only a field of sensations and whatever causal explanations you're holding in your mind are drawing relationships between these various sensations, trying to make sense of them.

Yes, but that doesn't mean that it's false, right? I know for a fact that because of that bar on my neck, on that very day, I had the worst headache ever (so painful that I had to tear up) Had it ever since, but not as bad that I have to cry . I even felt that something moved, but ok, what happened, happened, but it is still good to know what caused it so that you can find a solution for it (when I go to a physio for instance so they know what to do about it)

Sorry if I am talking a lot about my accident and my injury, but it's something that bothers the ego, not the I, but the ego and the ego is trying to find ways to cure it. 

Yes, I understand that pain is pain and it's a sensation, but is there a cure for this? (haha, I'm asking you as if you are a doctor :D)

[Leo Gura]

11 minutes ago, Winny said:

Yes, but that doesn't mean that it's false, right?

It's not false per se, it's conceptual, relative, and partial.

There are multiple orders of reality which we can talk about. Be careful not to confuse them. Sensation is a 1st order thing. Causation is a 2nd order thing. Similar to how sand is a 1st order thing and sand castles are a 2nd order thing.

In this inquiry we are only interested in 1st order things. So stop asking 2nd order questions.

[Winny]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

It's not false per se, it's conceptual, relative, and partial.

There are multiple orders of reality which we can talk about. Be careful not to confuse them. Sensation is a 1st order thing. Causation is a 2nd order thing. Similar to how sand is a 1st order thing and sand castles are a 2nd order thing.

In this inquiry we are only interested in 1st order things. So stop asking 2nd order questions.

Ok, understood. 

I guess the healing the process is something I'll have to find out  

[abrakamowse]

Did you read these exercises @Winny ?

They are good... the mind will always reject the idea of no-self. Direct pointing is the way... direct experience and not what the ego-mind says.

 

 

Edited June 27, 2020 by abrakamowse

[Winny]

36 minutes ago, abrakamowse said:

Did you read these exercises @Winny ?

They are good... the mind will always reject the idea of no-self. Direct pointing is the way... direct experience and not what the ego-mind says.

 

 

Yes, I already took a look at them and there are some that I still need to experience, but some I already have. I feel like I have a 0.5% glimpse into reality. Still need to practice more  

[abrakamowse]

10 minutes ago, Winny said:

Yes, I already took a look at them and there are some that I still need to experience, but some I already have. I feel like I have a 0.5% glimpse into reality. Still need to practice more  

Good !

[Winny]

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

It's not false per se, it's conceptual, relative, and partial.

There are multiple orders of reality which we can talk about. Be careful not to confuse them. Sensation is a 1st order thing. Causation is a 2nd order thing. Similar to how sand is a 1st order thing and sand castles are a 2nd order thing.

In this inquiry we are only interested in 1st order things. So stop asking 2nd order questions.

Ok, I just realized that questions such as will it be cured and all, are ego related because the real I doesn't care about that because it has no attributes  some days my ego is really strong and the stronger the pain, the stronger the ego -> looking for solutions for cure. So, I apologize again for mixing up 1st order questions and 2nd order ones.

Again, thank you for your patience <3 who knows, maybe if I'm really enlightened in 20 years time, I can do self healing