Floorcat

Ok I got confused as Robed Mystic was taking things as if Phil was asking him seriously & that confused me. Apologies to all, sincere thanks to Phil for your generous help. All the best to all, I’m doing away with forums & concentrating on practice ❤️

Ok fair play. Robed Mystic started taking it literally so that confused me. Sorry to derail the thread, I’ll step out .

Can you please enlighten so we can put it to bed? Is the whole thread a hypothetical role play? Or did it start as a hypothetical role play then turn into genuine questioning by Phil? This it what it seems like. Can anyone clarify?

This thread is confusing me. Is Phil doing role play, or does he really not understand what he is fundamentally as Robed Mystic says?

But if that's the case, why did Robed Mystic say to Phil: "It's sad that you have thrown around the terminology of no self your entire spiritual career . And now you want to understand what it is. I've got news for you. This is ineffable. Oh wait..but you already knew that? Stop with the mental masturbation. It doesn't suit you." Apologies to Phil & all involved if I'm being dense here, just confused.

Can you explain? You mean he's taking on the role of a non-realised person to thrash though a process in that thread? Apoligies, Phil, if so.

@PhilOne sec - I've just found this: Is this you asking questions other forum members about no-self & not understanding? I thought you were realised? Am I missing something? Are you not Nahm?

The one you prescribe, as above.

Ahh, yes, ‘myself’ is the wrong way to put it. Then in your words, notice the self-referential thoughts. So my revised question is: “So could these not be the distilled course of action now? Do the practices, get ever deeper & more present and keep noticing self referential thoughts referring to an imaginary second self?”

Apologies for the late reply. I feel unready to understand your questions here - I investigate yet it confounds me, being the me. I like your writing here: "The way to ‘break the loop’ is to notice self referential thoughts. Thoughts about a self which isn’t you. Thoughts about a ‘second self’, which is always in the past or future… and never actually, present. Thoughts which are noticed by how the thoughts feel to you." I'm a sticker for simplicity, I meditate in the simplest way etc. Can I not take these wonderfully simple instructions and apply on a daily basis? Also I see in an actualized thread, you write: "Simply put: Focus on perception & feeling, rather than thoughts. Basic Relaxation. Walking Meditation. Eating Meditation. Gounding. Mindfulness of sound. The emotional scale. Don’t resist boredom and ‘stay in’ pessimism" These are basically my own practices at the moment. I feel I need to raise my consciousness quite a bit before I can 'get' your line of questioning. It's not me copping out, I've really put effort in & I know you're saying truth as I hear the same from other teachers. But your statement above ("The way to ‘break the loop’ is to notice self referential thoughts. Thoughts about a self which isn’t you. Thoughts about a ‘second self’, which is always in the past or future… and never actually, present. Thoughts which are noticed by how the thoughts feel to you.") rings true for me and is more pallatable than the questions. This seems to be what youre asking me to do with your 'who is the looker'. So could these not be my distilled course of action now? Do the practices, get ever deeper & more present and keep catching myself referring to an imaginary second self & investigating that until something twigs?

(Apologies, amended my post half an hour after posting)

In what way? I felt that since ‘I’ can’t fathom this at the moment as there’s nothing to fathom, I just need to allow what’s there to be more apparent by getting thoughts out of the way. Sounds like this isn’t the right idea 🙂 looks like it’s me trying to avoid the issue then. I’ll turn back to it - I just don’t know - is the sense of knowing really just a thought? Yes on reflection I think it is. So what can be ‘other’ than the thoughts and feelings that occur. This is what I’m trying to get to but foils me every time. It’s like I’m trying to look for something that isn’t the thoughts or the feeling of me, but it’s elusive. Perhaps I shouldn’t even be looking for something ‘other’? I read supposedly awakened people say there’s some background awareness/consciousness that contains everything, some expansive unknowable something without form or quality, but when I try & glimpse it, all I’m glimpsing are my own thoughts of it, which I think must be a hint, but always just turns out to be false. Your statement “Notice the ever so slight tension, of the believing of the thought self has attention - notice the notion or implication that there even is some thing called: “attention”. Some “experience” of a me and a thing or world upon which “my attention” is cast or is placed upon and withdrawn from. ” is very interesting. Yes there is a slight tension involved in looking - it looks like I’m splitting myself in two in an effort to see something, but only seeing more thoughts & images that I’m myself creating. What’s behind all this. You and others say what is thinking etc, but I never find an answer or get an insight into anything.

Yes, it’s clear now. Anything that I point to, refer to or describe is just thought, even ‘awareness’ or ‘presence’. All speculation is pointless other than to point out it’s just thought So the only practical thing to be done is a lot of meditation, do-nothing sitting. No point speculating about it further, surely? (If that sounds rude I don’t mean it to be, very much appreciate your input).

This isn what's always confused me: In your self inquiry instructions: 4. Place your attention on the inner feeling of being "me." 5. If a thought does arise, ask yourself to whom this thought is occurring, as this returns your attention to the feeling of being "me." This practice of turning awareness back upon itself, prior to the ‘I’.. Doesn't that imply there's a feeling of 'me' that we're turning our attention to in the method? But it also says that we're turning our attention back to awareness which is prior to the I.. So which is the 'me' in the technique? Perhaps the I/me IS just a thought about me rather than a defined entity, I'm going to have to go into that more. But I'm confused which me to rest my attention on with self inquiry. You're right - but why is there a feeling of dropping a psychological 'world', a big relief and clarity? Maybe that's just my unusual interpretation. It seems like it - doesn't one start with a busy monkey mind and eventually the mind gets peaceful? /that's been my experience. Apart from getting a vague feeling of a centre around the head area, there doesn't seem to be anything tangible there apart from the thoughts, which appear by themselves out of thin air - and also occur purposefully and deliberately , like when trying to solve a problem etc. Got it. I can't pin one down, except a sense of knowing when there's no thoughts - is that sense of knowing it? It feels like me. Still coming from my head though. This relates to Ramana's and your instructions and frustrates me so much - what is this I that needs to be rested in? That state of 'knowing' without thought?

Hmm. There's a apparent sensation of 'I', but it doesn't seem concrete in any way other than it feels separate, and often insecure and exposed. There doesn't seem to be an I watching this I other than the I youre talking about is apparent, I guess there's a pre-recognition that it exists, an unspoken awareness of all that's going on. But awareness of that doesn't make the feeling of me go away.. It doesn't seem to have a fixed place. It's sometimes in my head & sometimes lower down. But it doesn't seem to have anything about it to pin down as a quality except the feeling of me and all the emotions & conflicing feelings that go along with it. The quieter my mind gets, it seems that, in the moment there's less & less aware of the what's not in direct experience. But of course the me is still there at the centre of it all I'm not sure I understand, I'll have a think and come back to this one. All that's apparent is that when I started meditation there was much more confusion and a swirling of elements and after 6 months, most of this has gone & the moment is mostly filled with what's in my present experience. Bothe experiences are very different. The second: There's the direct experience of thoughts of an inside and outside, and of existence and nonexistence, and of a self which might or might not be right? Does that mean anything I'm not even remotely thinking of doesn't in fact exist? I get a faint idea of what you mean. Prior to the thinking things just are. I can be aware of that to some extent - but perhaps that becomes much more apparent after more meditation? The body just feels like a vague mass of sensation that can be zoned in on according to body part - but still a field of sensation. There doesn't seem to be a hard line/barrier between this and the outside, except when I look down at my body I mentally create the barrier. I don't think the first self that is present and in a state exists does it? Isn't there an unspoken awareness? So more and more meditation allows this to become more apparent? Apologies for the formatting, I messed it up a bit!

I've been messaging Phil trying to dig into a few things & he thought it might be useful to post the messages as a thread. I still have some way to understanding but am hoping to get clearer on this. I'll lay the questions/answers out on this first post: Me: Hi Phil, I’ve just finished setting up my life to do consciousness work & like to keep my practices simple. Do nothing meditation with self inquiry is my preferred path, with exercise & yoga. Your description of self enquiry here: https://www.actualityofbeing.com/self-inquiry is the best I’ve seen and would suit my approach perfectly. When you say ‘Place your attention on the inner feeling of being "me”, I think I get that, there’s definitely that feeling around my chest/head area - a feeling of knowing that I am. Is that what you mean to rest my attention on and keep coming back to? Phil: Not the feeling of knowing… just feeling. It might be more clarifying to point out that ‘place your attention’ is a half step. The full step would be seeing through “attention”, and might sound like allow attention to sink into the source of “attention”. It might also be fruitful to explore sensation prior to the do nothing or self inquiry. This is essentially asking, ‘is there the presence of sensation in the bottoms of the feet?’ Then it is noticed directly, that there is. Then inwardly explore, ‘is this presence of sensation present throughout the entire body?’ Then it is noticed directly that it is. Then inwardly explore, attempting to find an ‘edge’ of sensation. Precisely where sensation begins and or ends. Then, take sensation off altogether, just like you would a pair of shoes or a jacket. Just set sensation aside. Me: Thanks Phil, very much appreciated 🙂 Lastly, although I prefer your method, some people suggest that self enquiry is continual questioning of the what the self is and gradually eliminating what it is not. Is this a different method to yours? Phil: That would be contemplating or contemplation. In self inquiry every thought is let go / the ‘answer’ is not going to be of thoughts. In do nothing, even letting a thought go would be a doing. Neti neti is a practice of labeling ‘not this’, ‘not that’. Me: Perfect, thanks Phil. I want to keep things simple - am I right that self enquiry & do-nothing meditation is all that’s needed? Phil: Needed for what? 🙂 Me: For awakening, to go through the process that you’ve gone through. Phil: Is that known, or believed? Me: Believed 🙂. My experience is that that Phil, this forum & anything outside my direct experience is imaginary. But I have a desire for more awakening and to pursue truth at a deeper level. This is all imaginary too of course, but putting that aside for a moment & allowing for second order practicality, I want to ‘fully’ awaken before I die, whatever that is. Of course I don’t even know what that is at present, I only can know that I’m in a much more awakened state than I used to be & there’s room for more awakening still. Allowing for the understanding that that’s also a mental projection, but one I have to rely on to some degree to peruse more awakening. Phil: That’s still believing it (whatever could be outside direct experience) is, but covering up the belief with the belief it’s imaginary. The first belief is my experience is (known). ‘Imagining away’ thought attachment doesn’t resolve thought attachment. Self inquire. Who has a desire? Desire is a thing you have? You’re a thing? The thing you are is in a state? Like, Ohio? What’s a “mental projection”? Me: OK I feel I have some way to go. As I get quieter and more present, it certainly feels like now is all there is and that even though I *feel* I know there's stuff outside that experience, i.e the garden, local town etc. they are not pictured in my experience. It feels like I've was previously carrying a 'world' inside my head that has disappeard and I'm not living that way any more. From what you're saying, this is definitely not 'it' and I haven't seen the truth of it - am I right that there's a step further that means the outside world really *doesn't* exist in actual fact, i.e. 100% unreal? For example I feel like I can walk into town now if I wanted to and experience all the shops - but that's all fantasy and can never happen? So there really *is* no town? It's all in my imagination and has no reality to it at all? So this is where we're at with the conversation. Apologies if I personally only answer to Phil as I'm hoping to take it further with him..