Mahberry

Haha, very ironic and not the Alanis Morisette kind. So, what have all of you get from shouting down xabir? How has contempt before investigation served any of you? If no self can be made sense of then it would be in a book and everyone can read themselves into attainment. That would be great though, then everyone can do with a lot less suffering.

What do you get from all this Informer? Surely you yourself know too you're pulling this all out from your butt? That's all I have to say.

I think that is fairly obvious from his previous posts even before gems like: But it is just not right to dismiss his personal crusade against RT without actually clarifying. Now anyone reading this and the previous page can make an informed opinion regarding his false RT suggested no self realization. No way someone who's seen it would say this:

You hurt my feelings. I think I'll stop now.

Does this mean your false no self realization requires the knowledge of the chakra system that without it the realization can't take place?

I don't follow. Why false self?

Yea, why wouldn't Seth Ananda visit the forums anymore?

I guess I'll just leave other people to make sense of it later.

I can't make sense of this at all. What is meant by self isn't a single aspect as the ego would have it?

Can you expand on your realization a little bit more? What brings you to the conclusion that the self as ego is false?

Did you have a post somewhere describing what it was like when you first will yourself into believing the no self fallacy? I might just drop the entire thing if it matches mine.

Tell me, what is your realization like?

See it for yourself, then only decide on whether you still want to shit on it.

That's reassuring. Thank you! I guess all I need is more seeing for it to sink in.

Hey xabir (and Vajra and CowTao), yesterday I was observing my thoughts trying to look for an I. Something shifted and I see the only I that ever existed was in the thoughts. There is an I because the thoughts said so. It was so obvious there was never an I apart from the thoughts. Thing is the moment I try to describe the experience, the I has slowly crept back in and I'm back to living my thoughts again. I've almost forgotten what the seeing is like and now all that's left is an understanding the seeing left behind. Hearer was never there, it was only a thought that says "I am hearing." Seer was never there, it was only a thought that says "I am seeing." Thinker was never there, it was only a thought that says "I am thinking." There was no truth to anything apart from what the thought says, if I am confused or frustrated it was because the thoughts said so. I will never know otherwise because I was never not my thoughts. The seeing was doubtlessly real but if it can be lost, might it be a false seeing? I'm still trying to get back into seeing as of now.

Compare this, the knowledge of your body as you with your sense of you right now. The sense of me, I, is very strong. When asked who are you, it's almost obvious, well I'm me, right now, looking through the eyes, moving my limbs about right now. So obvious. But when you say, "I am my body, of course. I see people walking about and they have bodies too. Certainly this body is me." Is that not built upon concepts? Even if you have never seen your own body with your own eyes and have no knowledge of any of your bodyparts, you will still have a strong sense of I. The sense of I has a cocky assurance of itself. I am me, who else do you think is thinking and speaking and wanting and desiring. Yet it doesn't have to know it thinks from a brain and is sure that he exists without needing to be proven. Do you share what I see? Or do you find me absurd? I hope it makes sense to you as it did to me. I was dumbfounded when I first read about Ramana Maharshi's self inquiry practice. "The fuck does he mean who am I? I am me of course, so obvious, who do you think is thinking and moving this body about?" I don't know how but I came to know what he meant by a sense of I in our experiences and now the "Who am I?" practice makes sense. Again, if you still exist when you lose a limb, does that not mean the limb is yours but not you. You own the limb, now it's not yours and it was never you to begin with because it was a 'mine' relationship and not 'me'. So, now that you have honed in on the 'I' in a small cluster of your brain, where is it? Know that there's someone with only a left hemisphere and also someone with a right hemisphere. Which cluster of brain cells do you think can make up the I? All these are just thought experiments for you to do away with relying on concepts and assumptions. Point is to fall back on your perception, RIGHT NOW, to find the I. Do you see when you're relying on concept and when you're relying on direct perception (albeit through an I)? Let me know if you find anything I say stupid or senseless.

Another one, some confusion I have from Master Clyman's youtube videos. When he's teaching condensing breathing, he's saying that we breathe into the stickman but then he'll say keep your attention on the dantien. Where should my attention really be at? I can't seem be aware of both the stickman and dantien.

Is it possible to do too much condensing breathing?

Wow, very interesting. Thanks.

If it's science then it would be the brain sensing the senses. The senses only takes in stimuli and it's not obvious at all if not for our education but it has been so ingrained in us we forgot it was taught to us. Is the body you or is the body yours? If you think it's you as opposed to yours then does it make sense that we can lose a part of it and we'll still be us? If you think the body is yours then who is the you owning the body?

I've been doing this every morning for the past month. Very stretchy movements and seems to relieve my tight muscles and sluggishness in the morning. I push a little bit more forcefully on the extension part of the movement because it feels so damn good.

But that would mean I just fall right back into Otis's first assumption. This body is the self. I guess this no self thing is an altered state of consciousness that removes the self so our thoughts operate without a referencing point? Do you stay in no self all day long, CowTao? Is it a better mode of living than self-ing?

Yes, completely valid. There is obviously a self. I am posting this right now to reach out to someone else. How can I say there is no self when obviously I'm doing something to please my self. I guess the 'self' eastern religions try to no self with is the sense of self that feels violated when someone inflicts pain on it, that feels being stolen from when someone steal things we have claimed possession of, that feels little when someone think attribute negative qualities to it. The self we hold in our head that believes it has tangible qualities like generous, kind, smart, caring. A self that has a story behind it that is totally subjective and serves to romanticize its life and selectively chooses experiences that embellishes its history. Not no self as in this body is not real, it's an illusion but no self as in there's no self apart from this body. The self who we think is kind, smart, caring, gentle, hardworking, righteous, better than the average bear is a concept and mechanism for survival that has crystallized so much we think is the true self that exists apart from the body. All I've written are just intellectual diarrhea of mine, not rooted in realizations. If it sounds stupid to you, it probably is.

That is a conceptual understanding of self. It's more in the line of "I think self is... <concepts, models, assumptions>". Find the self that is feeling pain, that wants pleasure. Right now when you say this and when you're angry and when you're hungry there's a very strong sense of I am. I AM saying this, I AM angry, I AM hungry, I AM in pain, I AM in joy. Have you ever try locating and seeing clearly what this sense of I am is like? I am not ruthless truthing you, I don't know no self either. It's just that I see you're taking a very intellectual approach to self. The search for self wasn't meant to belong in a textbook to be read and understood by others. It gives nothing but another concept/idea for people to make love with.

We can lose any of our limbs and live. Any of our organs can be swapped (like in a transplant). There are even cases of people surviving on only half a brain. Who are we? Our left hemispheres or our right hemispheres? In the body we can't find a real us that remains us. Someone with only the left hemisphere: http://www.mymultiplesclerosis.co.uk/misc/cameron-mott.html Someone with only the right hemisphere: http://articles.cnn.com/2009-10-12/health/woman.brain_1_brain-language-abilities-rewired?_s=PM:HEALTH