The looking process with Rowland took a couple of months. Our conversation was quite long, but I did not want to cut anything out. It was full-on looking and investigating. We covered many angles until all became clear. What amazes me is that even though Rowland started seeing a psychiatric nurse and getting a mental health assessment in the middle of the process, neither interfered or made the investigation difficult. He was looking with full focus and determination, and I was overjoyed for him.
Rowland: Hi Ilona, First of all, thank you so much for the awesome Liberation Unleashed website! I have been earnestly investigating the presence of the “I,” seeing if it can be located. There seem to be one or two “sticky” areas.
How shall we start?
Ilona: Okay, so tell me what you are looking for?
How ready are you to see it?
What do you expect to see, experience, feel?
Rowland: Thanks, Ilona. I guess (if I am really honest) I am looking for some kind of “bliss” or “enlightened state” despite reading that there is no such thing! Certainly, the end to psychological, self-centered suffering which has dodged this body-mind for years (but is now starting to feel a bit lighter).
There is a bit of confusion as to inquiry. Should I be looking for the false, separate “I,” or should I also be inquiring into presence/awareness itself (the big “I”)? Maybe alternating between the two? I guess ultimately both are necessary. Seeing through the ego and noticing awareness as one’s true, unchanging state—and getting really clear on this.
There is also a bit of conceptual confusion about presence/awareness which comes from reading too many books and writings by teachers. We are told that we are “not” the body or thoughts, we are the unchanging backdrop within which all arises. But also that body/world/thoughts are inseparable from this awareness! So, we are both unaffected by what arises and also intimately one with it? My mind spins in circles on this, not knowing where to focus! But I guess that is just what the mind does. There is a definite readiness to see it. I think I am expecting to see more clearly, and to feel “lighter” in terms of mental baggage. To see the “I” for what it is. Thank you, Ilona!
Ilona:
I guess (if I am really honest) I am looking for some kind of “bliss” or “enlightened state.”
Nice. But this ain’t about bliss or states. All states come and go and are not permanent. Some people have an awakening event and others just shrug—Is that it? It can be very subtle. There is no set way. The only way it happens is the right one for you, so bliss is not necessarily going to happen. You may rest this to the side for now. Seeing is pattern recognition, not a change of a state. It’s a change of view.
Despite reading that there is no such thing! Certainly, the end to psychological, self-centered suffering which has dodged this body-mind for years (but is now starting to feel a bit lighter).
It is not the end of suffering. End of suffering happens when there are no more triggers left. And that is all conditioning. The whole structure that was built in years does not disappear instantly.
There is a bit of confusion as to inquiry. Should I be looking for the false, separate “I,” or should I also be inquiring into presence/awareness itself (the big “I”)? Maybe alternating between the two? I guess ultimately both are necessary. Seeing through the ego and noticing awareness as one’s true, unchanging state—and getting really clear on this.
Okay, there is no big “I.” Awareness is not “I.” There is no ego as an entity in charge, there is nothing to get rid of, kill, or drop. Seeing through ego is realizing that there is no ego, it’s just a label, a word used for communication about the behavioral patterns. Replace the word “ego” with the word “character” and it’s not so negative anymore.
“Being” is not a noun, it’s a verb, and there is nothing simpler or more natural than being.
Find the sense of being. Are you doing it?
Can you stop being for a second?
See what happens if you try.
There is a definite readiness to see it.
Oh great. That helps a lot.
I think I am expecting to see more clearly, and to feel “lighter” in terms of mental baggage. To see the “I” for what it is.
Yes, good one.
Okay, write to me if you are ready to leave all the above expectations behind and take a fresh look. Also, was anything in my answer triggering reactions? If so, what was it? Sending love.
Rowland: Thank you so much, Ilona. That was incredibly helpful! It made me realize how many mind-created expectations have still been in play.
Yes, I am certainly ready to leave these behind. This jumped out at me:
“Being” is not a noun, it’s a verb, and there is nothing simpler or more natural than being.
Find the sense of being. Are you doing it?
Can you stop being for a second?
See what happens if you try.
There was a big Yes! to the simplicity of this! It is just “this” sense of being, right now. This aware-ing of sensations, sounds, thoughts, feelings, colors, and so forth. And, this awareness doesn’t change, whilst everything that arises in it does. But they’re not separate from it either. And this is something that thought is not going to grasp, is it? One of the things that I have struggled with in the past is the idea that the world arises in what I am, in awareness. So somehow awareness contains everything that is seen/heard/felt, and yet it nonetheless feels limited to the contours of this body; it feels like it is located inside “my” body. If that makes sense? Not sure how well I’m expressing myself here. But again, this is only an issue for thought. Pause the thought and where is the problem? Love and light!
Ilona: Nice, thank you for the answer. You say that it feels that awareness is contained in the body. Well, take a look to see if it’s true.
When you hear a sound, is it heard in the body? Listen now.
When you smell something, is it felt in the body?
When you look at the distance, is the horizon in the body? Look, where is the line between here and there?
When you look down and see the legs, is awareness in the legs? Or in seeing? Take a look, can seeing be contained in the body?
What have you noticed?
Sending love.
Rowland: Thank you so much for your reply, Ilona. It had a powerful effect here. Sound feels neither inside nor outside. Perhaps both. There doesn’t seem to be an inside and an outside, on direct evidence. These are thoughts.
When you smell something, is it felt in the body?
This is more subtle, but again, perhaps both inside and outside.
No, the horizon is not in the body and there is no way of demarcating “here” from “there.” Or where seeing ends, and a “seen” object begins. There is just “seeing.” If I look back to see “where the one who sees is,” there is nobody immediately findable.
When I look at my legs, I just see varieties of color. There is also a tactile sensation that, in direct evidence, is not necessarily “the same as” the visual color—until thought comes in and says these are all components of “leg,” and all occur in the same place at the same time. So awareness is not in the leg because the perception/sensation of leg is a finite object. Does this make sense? “Leg” is something I am aware “of.” But it is not itself aware. It feels, as I look, as if awareness is in the seeing. And then it feels that this seeing is in the head. It does still feel quite strongly like “I” am seeing from “my” head. But if I ask myself “Where is awareness?,” it is impossible to pin down. The sensations of “head,” the thought “I,” all occur within it. Then the thought arises: This has to be “my” body, as only “I” can feel it.
Thank you again for this dialogue. It is so helpful! It is really cutting away at ingrained assumptions. Love, R.
Ilona: Nice! Okay, so now investigate closely and see if there is a boundary between inside and outside.
Try with eyes open and eyes closed. Is there inside and outside?
Is awareness contained?
In what? In the head?
Can you see your own head without a mirror?
Yes, you can only feel this body, not multiple bodies and not some other body. Does that mean you own this one?
Is there an owner at all?
Is it the body that experiences or is the body experienced?
Investigate and answer when ready. Sending love.
Rowland: Thank you, Ilona!
If I am really honest in terms of experience, and if I don’t focus on thoughts, there is no evidence at all of a boundary. There is just sensation (the body) and perception (sounds, colors, smells) mediated by the body. Thought supplies the “me in here” and “you/it out there.” Even the apparent boundary of the body is not that stable. If looked at closely, sensations are in constant flux; and with eyes closed, where does the sensation of “leg” end and “chair” begin? There is just undivided sensation. The sound of someone’s voice that is arising at the moment (from the next room) is, oddly, arising “in me.” Similarly, there is no evidence or possibility of awareness being contained, even in a head. Indeed, the sensations of “head,” and even the notion of a “head,” must arise within awareness. Awareness must be prior.
Yes, you can only feel this body, not multiple bodies and not some other body. Does that mean you own this one?
Is there an owner at all?
Thought powerfully insists that this is “my” body, but without thought, it is just sensation/perception. No owner; nothing personal. How is the sensation of “leg” more “mine” than the sensation of “chair” (when eyes are closed, going on direct evidence)? It is thought that supplies the narrative of “me” and “mine.”
Is it the body that experiences or is the body experienced?
The body must be experienced. Awareness experiencing sensation/perception (and therefore simply experiencing itself)? A leg is not conscious, it is an object in consciousness like a tree or a toothbrush. Or even a thought! What has become clear, as I have looked, is just how compelling thought is in constructing the “I.” It takes the raw data of sensation and converts it into a heavy, ongoing narrative. How does one stop the I-thought from being so sticky and compelling? Thank you again, Ilona! Love, R.
Ilona: Good observations. Now look.
Are you awareness?
Is it personal?
Is awareness prior to, or is it arising together with, the objects that it is being aware of?
Can it be separated?
In experience now, listen to sound; is there anything there besides what is heard?
It is thought that supplies the narrative of “me” and “mine.” Yes, “owner” is an assumption.
How does one stop the I-thought from being so sticky and compelling?
See it as empty and nothing sticks to it anymore.
What does the word “I” point to?
Here are some questions for you to sit with. Much love back.
Rowland: Thank you so much, Ilona! I have been sitting with your questions, reflecting on them.
Without the narrative of thought, there is no sense in which awareness could be called “personal.” It is not “mine.” Ideas like “mine” arise and fall within it. It just is.
Also: if it were “personal,” this would require the dualism of “other persons”; and again, on present evidence, there are no “other persons.” (This was quite a shock when it first hit me! It left me feeling strangely lonely but again, this is only because a thought had slipped in and was being believed. I am alone—but is there actually an “I” to be lonely?)
“Other people” are only present awareness: they cannot be separated from what is aware right now. Awareness therefore cannot be separated, although I also intuit that it cannot be affected: it is both changeless and the substance of change at the same time (if this makes sense?). It is aware of (say) a sound, noticing it come and go; and it also is that sound in its entirety. Again, I hope I am expressing this clearly! So, I think it is both prior to experience, and also one with experience. It has to be prior/changeless in order to register change; but it is not in any way apart from change, either. When a sound is heard, there is just the hearing, no “hearer,” no “sound,” in fact. Just the hearing.
See it as empty and nothing sticks to it anymore.
What does the word “I” point to?
When this question is asked, there is just silence. Thought might then come in and make suggestions, but it can only refer to other thoughts. Even “this body” or “this mind” or “these memories” are other thoughts. Memory, however, does seem to be sticky and compelling here: it weaves a seemingly strong narrative of “me” going back in time. But perhaps the question is: To whom do memories refer? To which individual? Thank you again, your e-mails are so helpful! Love, R.
Ilona: Great stuff, you are on the right track.
Watch the YouTube video of Alan Watts talking about the “boat analogy” [see the video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= G4j6cUwCRmI]; it’s about time. This is actually a great picture of how past appears to be. Then, contemplate what you notice now when looking at a memory of a past event.
Find the feeling of being, aliveness, am-ness. Just sit and feel for a bit.
Can you tell if there is a being or just being?
Is life happening to a being or as being?
What do you notice?
When you look at nature and how all moves interdependently, is that movement outside of you? Is there a “you”?
Sending love.
Rowland: Thank you, Ilona! The video was very clear.
Contemplate what you notice now when looking at a memory of a past event.
Memories of past events only ever arise now, in this moment. A memory only seems to refer to another thought or memory. Where is the “me” whom memories describe? Where is the “me” who “has” a past? If I look for one, I can’t find one. Memories arise like anything else: sounds, sights, sensations, perceptions. Only another thought makes them personal, and then they become the memories of a “me.” This brings a lightness. Although the I-thought still feels quite strong, it has definitely loosened a bit. There is just what is happening now, naturally, spontaneously. Awareness does not have the anxious preoccupation with time that the mind has, moving compulsively into past and future; in fact, it cannot move into past or future! It is just here, now, naturally and effortlessly aware. There is such a simplicity to this. I think I need to sit with it a bit more, too.
Find the feeling of being, aliveness, am-ness. Just sit and feel for a bit.
Can you tell if there is a being or just being?
Without the thought This is happening to me, this is my body, there is just being. There is physical sensation (hands on a keyboard); visual sensation (colors on and around a screen); the sound of a dog barking, of my hands typing; the sensation of thoughts arising and falling. All of this is changing, moment by moment. And there is something here that is noticing this change, and is not the change. But equally, it is not in any way apart from the change (Does that make sense?). Perhaps it is clearer to say that arisings depend on awareness and cannot be separated from awareness; but that awareness does not depend on arisings (as in deep sleep). It is ultimately unaffected by them. For a moment there was frustration here, too: an irritation with the body and thought, and a desire to get away from them, as if they are obstacles to seeing clearly. But who is irritated or frustrated? In fact, who needs to see clearly? Is seeing clearly not already naturally, spontaneously happening, and just being missed?
Is life happening to a being or as being?
What do you notice?
Life is happening as being, again, unless there is an investment in self-referential thought. It is happening “to a being” if there is a separate “being”—a person doing the being, acting apart from the rest of life. But where is this separate being “doing” the being?
When you look at nature and how all moves interdependently, is that movement outside of you? Is there a “you”?
Nothing is outside being-awareness, the colors/sounds/smells/tactile information/movement of nature cannot be separated from what is presently aware here, even though (paradoxically) what is presently aware itself does not move. The green color of a leaf, for example: How could this be separated from the seeing of it? Could it exist outside the seeing of it? The sound of a bee, or rain drumming on the roof, can these experiences be separated from the hearing of them? It can be quite shocking (in a good way) to see how assumptions operate. For example, the idea that when I leave my house to go to work, the house continues to exist independently. Where is the evidence for this? Where is the evidence that the house exists away from or apart from this present awareness? There is almost a feeling that awareness “composes” an apparent world, moment by moment, that the “world” is only the present (immediate) contents of consciousness. So, for example: I can presently see the computer, books, a cup, the wall in front of me; there is the sensation of a chair; there is the sound of my cat’s claws. Where is the evidence that there is anything else? For example; a town, another country, a world in which other things are happening, even a universe? This makes me feel strangely lonely—there is just this awareness, nothing and nobody else—but, who is lonely? Awareness may be utterly alone (all-one), but is it lonely? Thank you again, Ilona. Love, R.
Ilona: What is awareness?
Some kind of lone witness?
Or is witnessing too just happening, done by no one?
Is awareness a container in which all arises?
Keep digging.
Rowland: Thank you, Ilona! I have been sitting with and investigating the questions above; here are my reflections.
If a thought arises, say, the thought I am hungry, it is seen or witnessed. But, if the seer or witness is looked for, there is nobody there. If the thought It’s me that sees the thought arises, then who witnesses this thought? Again: there is just emptiness. A “me” cannot be located that is not a transient thought, that is not an object that comes and goes. Awareness cannot be a container, as this would suggest boundaries or limits and these are not present, looking now in direct evidence. A container would also suggest a divide between awareness and its contents (like thoughts and perceptions) but again, this does not seem true to experience. Can a thought be separated from the awareness that notices it? What could a thought be outside of awareness? Where would “thought” end and “awareness of thought” begin? It would be impossible to mark any kind of division. Having said this, there does also seem to be a subtle difference: awareness itself is changeless, and therefore perceives change, so perhaps it is also prior to experience? If awareness itself was subject to change, the arising and falling of a thought would not be seen. And although a thought cannot be separated from aware presence, it is not itself aware. Nor is a sensation in a leg or arm.
Ilona: This made me smile. You cannot think your way out of this. Take a closer look.
Wait for a thought, notice its arrival and departure. See how it’s a tiny blink and how it is in itself empty. Thought + thought + thought becomes an expression, description, which in itself is empty. Now try this: get something tasty and experience the taste. Just feel it for a minute.
Focus on the sensation of tasting. What is it that does the tasting behind the sensation?
Is there anything behind?
Then for another minute describe that taste, describe in words what was felt. How similar or different are the experience and the description of it?
What do you notice here?
Do the same with smell. Take something and experience it, then describe in words.
Now try to describe awareness, just as you see it. What do you notice?
Sending love.
Rowland: Thank you, Ilona, for reminding me of the way thought tries to get a “grasp” on all of this! I think quite a bit of suffering and frustration come from this, and then trying to square what one teacher says with what another says, and then thought is spinning, and saying, I’m never going to get this! The mind is always trying to conceptualize; it is always looking for satisfaction, which it will never get. Perhaps it is also trying not to confront the fact of its own nonexistence!
Wait for a thought, notice its arrival and departure. See how it’s a tiny blink and how it is in itself empty.
Yes, this is clear: the thought “I” just arose, and left. But the space remains unaffected.
Now try this: get something tasty and experience the taste. Just feel it for a minute.
Focus on the sensation of tasting. What is it that does the tasting behind the sensation?
Is there anything behind?
There is no one who does the tasting—just the sensation of taste, immediate and present. The thought I am tasting this comes up automatically but then passes, and the taste remains.
Then for another minute describe that taste, describe in words what was felt. How similar or different are the experience and the description of it?
What do you notice here?
Initially I found it quite hard describing taste in words, and what struck me was the difference (total difference) between description and actual experience! What does the word “sweet” actually have in common with the sensation of “sweetness”?
Do the same with smell. Take something and experience it, then describe in words.
The same again. The description of “smell,” and the experience of it: almost no relation!
Now try to describe awareness, just as you see it. What do you notice?
One thing that has struck me while doing this investigation is how any verbal description doesn’t come close to actual experience. And yet we believe so strongly that words tell us what is “real.” Awareness feels like a kind of space in which everything is coming and going, which can’t be separated from those comings and goings but is not affected by them (even though it feels like it is). It is silent, alert, open, nonjudgmental. It doesn’t have any issues or preferences regarding any sensations that might come up.
For example, quite a lot of anxiety has been coming up over the past few days (I have suffered from panic, depression, and OCD for quite a few years). The mind constructs a horrible story around the sensations of fear, but awareness, if I look now, is just aware of what is happening. It is not wishing anything away.
Thank you, Ilona! I hope this e-mail finds you well and enjoying the sunshine. Love, R.
Ilona: Good work, Rowland! Let’s dig deeper. There is an exercise on my blog called “Labels” [see page 76 in this book]; do the exercise and write to me what you noticed. There is also an article on language [see “The Trick of Language” on page 73 of this book] in the articles section; read that too. So today, investigate how language works and report when ready. Much love.
Rowland: Thank you so much for that exercise, Ilona, really powerful and revealing! I found that writing without the “I”/“me” was less tense, no need to refer experience to an “I.” It felt lighter, more free. I also noticed how tempting it was to bring in an “I,” and how much the mind resisted this! Several times I had to catch myself when about to write “I hear” and so forth. The mind really wanted to own this. I feel at the moment like the mind really, really does not want to hear that it (the “I”) does not exist, and is afraid. It feels uncomfortable, almost, if it is not thinking and referring experience back to an “I,” and it will try anything to survive! Here is what I wrote (sorry, it’s probably extremely boring).
With “me”/“I”:
I am sitting in my chair at work. I am listening to the sounds outside: voices, cars, the hum of traffic, doors closing in the corridor. I am typing—I can feel the sensation of my fingers on the keys of the keyboard, I can see the colors of the keyboard and computer, I can hear the sounds of the typing as my fingers move over the keyboard.
Without “me”/“I”:
Sitting in the chair. Sensation of hardness against the feet. Pausing and hearing sounds outside. There are voices and doors opening and closing. Pausing again. Fingers moving over keyboard, sensation of hardness and cold. Pause. Hearing police siren outside. Pause, wondering what to write.
Thank you again, Ilona! Hope you are enjoying the bright summer sunshine. Love, R.
Ilona: Hi Rowland. Thanks for your reply. I see you missed the point of the second part of the exercise, slightly. The instruction was to write all in verbs, without subject doing action, just description of action happening. Try again, see if you notice a difference. Just go a little bit deeper into expressing experiencing through verbs; you had that in the beginning, but then it slipped. Use “ing” with words, like “feeling,” “hearing.” See if you notice more continuity, movement.
Does the description of what is happening influence what is happening? If so, what and how? Does it matter if you add “I” and “me” to the description, does that make “I” and “me” a doer?
Is there a doer?
Sending love.
Rowland: Thank you, Ilona. Sorry about the misunderstanding! I have just repeated the exercise (below is what I wrote). I found it very effective; it made me realize what a load of anxiety the belief in the “I” generates!
Does the description of what is happening influence what is happening? If so, what and how? Does it matter if you add “I” and “me” to the description, does that make “I” and “me” a doer?
No, the description does not influence what is happening, there are sounds/sights/sensations which are immediate. The description felt is completely secondary. With “I” and “me” added in, it felt heavier, with a weight of responsibility, as if “I” am doing the hearing, feeling, seeing, pausing, thinking, turning. If I look now, “I” cannot be the doer, however strong the conditioning might be, “I” is a thought that comes and goes. It seems to be the doer, but it cannot be. There is no real difference between the thoughts “I” or “Rowland” or “me” and the thoughts “broccoli” or “spirituality” or “chakra” or “rhubarb.” If I ask, “To what does the thought ‘I’ refer?” I can’t find anything. Just sensations and a kind of emptiness. It occurred to me that the link between the I-thought and the sensations of “body” is just an assumption.
Is there a doer?
It feels like there is one, but I can’t find one. The I-thought certainly cannot be the doer. A “doer” of thought can’t be found either.
Here is what I wrote the second time:
Sitting in chair, looking at screen, noticing letters, waiting for thought to arise, listening to voices outside, listening to doors opening and closing, feeling breath rising and falling, waiting for thought, listening to traffic, listening to clock ticking, feeling fingers on keyboard.
Thanks so much, Ilona! Love, R.
Ilona: Great observations! I see you are looking right at it. Yes, there seems to be a doer, but is there one? Maybe there is just doing happening? Walking, breathing, showering, raining, just happening. And it’s only a label that assumes an object does the action. Take a look at how language creates the illusion. It’s a good idea at this point to get out in natural surroundings and observe the totality of movement. While sitting and walking, watch how all is wiggling, all is moving interdependently, and that includes thinking and feeling, sensing with senses.
Is there anything that is separate from everything else?
Is there a line that divides me from everything else, or is it just a thought, an assumption?
Is there an inside and an outside?
Is there an owner of the body?
An owner of life?
How about a tree, is there an owner-tree inside that tree?
There are some questions for you to play with. Write to me once you have done this exercise. Looking forward to hearing from you. Much love.
Rowland: Thank you, Ilona! I really do appreciate your help and guidance. Nothing is separate except in thought, it is a play of sensations appearing in present awareness. Lots of movement and change, appearing in what doesn’t change, and not separate from that. And it is all happening presently, and presently, and presently. As I watched (a bee on a flower, the wind passing through a tree, horses eating grass, clouds moving in the sky), what hit me was a sense of lightness in nature. Everything just freely moving, but not “as” anything particular. A horse is not going around thinking, I am a horse, but I’m not a tree or a bee. It is just freely, brightly being. This is not to say that nature is always “nice” or “good”; it is beyond such categories, and much simpler. It is just what is happening, without judgement. Whether a beautiful flower opening to the sun, or a dying bird, or a cloud fading, or a spider catching and eating a struggling fly. Just what is happening. Any judgement on this is an imposition of the mind.
Again, it’s only thought that divides. There is no inside or outside, except in thought. No “me watching something separate called nature.” The body might feel separate, but does it? Is it? It is just the arising and falling of a cluster of sensations. These are not boundaries unless they are conceptualized. There is the sensation of a leg, and the visual sensation of a flower, both sensations appearing equally in, and equally “close” to, awareness.
Is there an owner of the body?
An owner of life?
How about a tree, is there an owner-tree inside that tree?
There seems to be an “owner” of the body, but if I look now I can’t find one. These hands are moving over the keyboard without the guidance of thought or any “doing” entity. Thoughts are appearing, and then going onto the screen, but where are these thoughts coming from? There is also no thought going into the movement of my hands. Things are happening quite spontaneously. It is conditioning, which does feel very strong, that insists otherwise. It still feels as if there is an entity inside my head, but again, as I pause now and look, I can’t find one. I can’t even find a head! Thought then says: Maybe there is one, but it can’t be found. But this is just thought spinning away to keep itself in the illusory driving seat. It feels like it doesn’t want to give up!
Love, R.
Ilona: Hi Rowland. Nice work. You are getting close.
Now look:
Can the body feel separate?
Is it the body that experiences or is the body experienced?
Is there an experiencer at all?
If you look at perceiver/perceiving/perceived, is there a gap?
Is there a perceiver to which perception is happening?
Test it with each sense and write what you notice.
Sending love.
Rowland: Thanks so much, Ilona. The sensations of the body are certainly experienced; but I can’t say with any certainty that the body itself experiences. Sensations are an object, they are experienced—like the sounds I can currently hear (cars, voices, sound of keys typing). The body just “feels” personal; it “feels” like it is experiencing because of years of conditioning. If I ask who is experiencing sensations, I can’t find anyone. I can’t find an experiencer, just thoughts that come up and hypnotically assert themselves as an “I.” Sometimes thoughts say: There is an “I,” but it just can’t be seen, because it is what I am. But where is the evidence for this? It feels like thought is pulling out all the stops, really fighting dirty! There is no findable perceiver, just perception being noticed.
Sound is registering here right now…tactile sensation…taste…smell…and the thought “I” or “me” or “Rowland” is equally being noticed by something…there are no gaps…just hearing, and so on.
There has been quite a bit of frustration here over the past couple of days. Thought has been coming up powerfully: I will never get this, I am unworthy of this. I seem to recognize this on some level, and yet on another level, moment to moment, the I/me/Rowland-thought still seems to be so strong and believable, still seems to take hold. It feels like it can be seen through momentarily. I can see the thought I right now, come and go, and yet seconds later it comes back and hooks me. But where is the me who gets hooked? Again, nothing can be found.
Thank you again for guiding me on this journey, Ilona!
Love, R.
If I ask who is experiencing sensations, I can’t find anyone.
The “who” question assumes an entity. There isn’t one. That’s how the answer is blank.
The body seems to feel that it is the experiencer because of a belief, unquestioned assumption, and yes, years of conditioning.
Take a look: Is there an “owner” of the body?
Thought can say many things. It can say that I am a pink panther. But the content of thought is a description, label, fiction, not actuality. There is an “I,” there isn’t an “I”; it’s just thoughts. The trick is to look where thoughts point to, where words make you look. Like the analogy of the finger pointing to the moon, words are fingers, the moon is experience.
It feels like it can be seen through momentarily. I can see the thought I right now, come and go, and yet seconds later it comes back and hooks me. But where is the me who gets hooked? Again, nothing can be found.
Oh yeah, there is a stage of going in and out, it will pass. Don’t try to understand, just watch it happening and let it go. Focus on experience rather than the story and keep looking, you are getting close.
Is there anything you expect or hope to happen?
If so, what?
Love back to you!
Rowland:
Take a look: Is there an “owner” of the body?
When I look for one, I can’t find one. Sensations, feelings, perceptions, happening now. Thought bubbling under with a But…trying to assert that there is an owner somewhere. Yes…but… That familiar voice in the head. So an owner of experience can’t be found, just experience. Yet, there is still this strong sense of an owner, somewhere.
Is there anything you expect or hope to happen?
If so, what?
It’s strange that even though there is this subtle loosening, an almost imperceptible link of pinpricks of light, it doesn’t feel like I am getting close. But, that is thought again perhaps, getting back to its old tricks. I decided this morning to have a fresh look at this “sense of self” that seems to persist, and to get rid of any non-dual language I might be using. I think maybe I have gotten too comfortable with this, having read so many non-dual books (and having bought the mug and t-shirt!). So, just authentic, honest, moment-by-moment writing of what is being seen. Just that. Here is what I wrote down. I hope it sort of makes sense, as I wrote fast, apart from pausing to look.
Why does this sense of self persist so strongly? It feels odd: on the one hand, I definitely can’t locate a separate self. When I have a look, all I can find is thoughts/feelings/sensations and something that notices these. Nothing else. Nothing that stays the same, nothing that isn’t in a constant process of change, apart from the noticing, which is constant. When I have another look now, what I think is that keeping the sense of self going is still belief in thought. It is the thoughts that are like a “stuck record” in my head, particularly memory thoughts. These still draw me in and make me think I am a “me” unfolding in time. They seem very compelling. They are often painful memories that replay, sometimes from years ago. They tell me things like, I am unworthy or I am bad. They tell me I am not “spiritual” enough, whatever that means. These are the kind of thoughts which I have suffered from even since childhood, self-punishing thoughts.
I’m going to have a good head-on look at this now. No non-dual language either! Where is the one to whom memories apply? What can be found? To whom do memories belong? What can actually be found when these questions are asked?
I find sensations, perceptions (sound of the oven, sound of cooking, sound of my pen on paper), thoughts. I find other sensations that might be called feelings. (Sensations in chest and stomach right now—they’re difficult to label because they keep moving about. The main feeling, though, is a little hint of freedom/joy, as not much is being found.)
Is there anyone here that memory describes, or belongs to? Anyone at all?
Can’t find anyone again.
Memories (like all thoughts) come and go in impersonal space (oops, that sounds a bit non-dual, but you know what I mean). They don’t refer to anything real. The past is not present; a memory is a thought referring to another thought. What is real are the thoughts themselves. All this is coming up spontaneously, thoughts/feelings/sensations. Stuff coming up! Memories are no more “mine” than the sound of the oven is mine. Why? There is equal awareness of both. Something notices the memory-thought, I made a cup of coffee five minutes ago. Something notices the sound of the oven. That something is not any closer to the thoughts than it is to the sound of the oven, even though those thoughts will say otherwise. Memory thoughts are not mine. They don’t describe a me! How could they? Where is the me described in memory? Nothing there. Nada. Silence.
While looking above, I noticed that thought seemingly wants to interrupt, as if there is a fear of being found out. There is a sense of something bad/rotten/sinful at the core that has been there since childhood. But where is this one who is bad/rotten/sinful? Does he actually exist? Scary place to look. Looking. Thoughts/sensations. Can’t find him, again!
Sorry to write so much above! But it helped having a good, hard, honest look. It felt good to really look for the person who is presumed to exist. I felt good at the end of it, a bit lighter. I think what I need to do (I?) is to keep digging, keep looking, be persistent, as the so-called “person” quickly seems to solidify and become heavy again. As I am writing this, it feels strongly like Rowland is writing it again. So I just need to keep digging, questioning, looking. Rowland comes back in so quickly. The empty something feels like it is wispy and fragile, when I know it’s not because it’s actually what’s real.
Thank you, Ilona! My gratitude to you is more than I can express. I need to ignore those thoughts that tell me I will never get this.
Love, R.
Ilona:
Yet, there is still this strong sense of an owner, somewhere.
Sense of an owner or an unquestioned assumption that there must be an owner.
Can you find an owner of sensations?
Test with each sense. Is there an owner of heard sounds?
Why does this sense of self persist so strongly? It feels odd: on the one hand, I definitely can’t locate a separate self. When I have a look, all I can find is thoughts/feelings/sensations and something that notices these. Nothing else. Nothing that stays the same, nothing that isn’t in a constant process of change, apart from the noticing, which is constant.
Yes, noticing awareness is always present, and its content, which is movement, is like a kaleidoscopic ever-changing movie of sensation, thoughts, and feelings.
Look more closely: Is there something that notices, and is what is noticed one and the same? Is there a gap?
When I have another look now, what I think is that keeping the sense of self going is still belief in thought. It is the thoughts that are like a “stuck record” in my head, particularly memory thoughts. These still draw me in, make me think I am a “me” unfolding in time. They seem very compelling.
Yes, thought says there is a sense of self. Take a look with senses.
Is there a sense of self in seeing, hearing, tasting?
Where and when does the sense of self arise exactly?
They are often painful memories that replay, sometimes from years ago. They tell me things like, I am unworthy or I am bad. They tell me I am not “spiritual” enough, whatever that means. These are the kind of thoughts which I have suffered from even since childhood, self-punishing thoughts.
Thoughts of judgement affect how we feel, but are they true?
Is it true that you are unworthy? Is it true that there is someone here to be unworthy?
How is unworthiness felt?
What is behind the sensations?
Is there a feeler of sensations to which sensations happen?
Memories (like all thoughts) come and go in impersonal space (oops, that sounds a bit non-dual, but you know what I mean). They don’t refer to anything real. The past is not present; a memory is a thought referring to another thought. What is real are the thoughts themselves.
Thoughts are here to be noticed, not to be believed.
All this is coming up spontaneously, thoughts/feelings/sensations. Stuff coming up!
Yes. All is happening in the present—sensations, thoughts, feelings.
While looking above, I noticed that thought seemingly wants to interrupt, as if there is a fear of being found out. There is a sense of something bad/rotten/sinful at the core that has been there since childhood.
Good one: Examine that closer, what is there that feels rotten? What is behind it?
Yes, yes, great stuff. Keep looking. And when Rowland comes back, check to see if that is not just a thought too, appearing effortlessly.
Rowland: Thank you so much, Ilona! I have had an interesting couple of days. On Sunday night, lying in bed, I was overcome by a feeling of terror as I lay there. A sense of profound disorientation, of not being able to find Rowland, of not being separate from anything (including the sensations of the bed I was lying on). Then yesterday morning, walking to the bus stop on the way to work, I was again seized by an intense fear, almost a panic attack. The closest I can describe was that it was like a kind of agoraphobia, like I had no boundaries, I was everywhere and everything at the same time: the trees I was seeing, the feel of the road beneath my feet, the clouds in the sky, the sound of the cars, all were as much me as the sensations of the body—sensations which hardly seemed to be there for a period. I felt dispersed, dissolved, and like I would lose my mind! Then, as I sat on the bus, the fear slowly dissolved.
While I was in this fearful state and unable to locate Rowland, there was equally no concern at all about all Rowland’s apparent worries and problems and stories! They seemed distant. I am deliberately not dwelling on this experience, though, as it is just an experience. Something similar happened about a couple of months ago: walking up the stairs to the bathroom, I was overwhelmed by fear at not being able to locate Rowland; there was a sense of panicking, desperately trying to reassert him. But looking now, it is not that I am afraid. Where is the “I” that is afraid? Having a look now.
Fear is a sensation/feeling that is experienced like any other. It is experienced in the same way as the sound of the clock ticking, or the feel of the floor beneath my feet right now. It feels like something is “more” aware of feeling than sound but is that actually true right now? It only seems that way because we have been conditioned to believe that feelings arise in something called “my personal body.” This itself is just sensations coming up now. What notices these sensations (called “body”), these feelings, these thoughts about experience, the sound of the clock? All really sensations, even thoughts. Looking now and nothing there but a sense of something wide and transparent and peaceful which can’t be found.
Sense of an owner or an unquestioned assumption that there must be an owner.
Can you find an owner of sensations?
Test with each sense. Is there an owner of heard sounds?
Looking for an owner of heard sounds and can’t find anything. There is just the sound of the clock ticking, footsteps, and so forth—just the hearing which is totally effortless. Is there anyone making hearing happen? Looking. No. Thought might say that “I” am “hearing,” but that is not true. How can a thought hear?
Can’t find an owner of seeing, either. There is just automatic seeing that can’t be stopped or started. If I close my eyes, there is still seeing. Seeing is happening. Can the thoughts “I” or “Rowland” see? No. Can’t find a taster, can’t find a smeller. What occurs to me is that only another thought links the I-thought to different sensations, the I-thought is itself a sensation. All just sensations appearing and disappearing. Thought, feeling, sound, sight.
Is there anything you expect or hope to happen?
If so, what?
If I am really honest, there is still a longing for peace and harmony, and an end to psychological suffering, and maybe the occasional blissful experience.
Look more closely: Is there something that notices, and is what is noticed one and the same? Is there a gap?
Yes, thought says there is a sense of self. Take a look with senses.
Is there a sense of self in seeing, hearing, tasting?
Where and when does the sense of self arises exactly?
There is no sense of self in seeing, hearing, tasting. There is just seeing, hearing, tasting, the sound of traffic, fingers tapping away, the feel of the keyboard, the colors on the screen. Where is the “I” in all of this? It is only in thought that a sense of self arises. Nowhere else. The sense of “my body” still feels strong and persistent. It still feels like it “houses” awareness, even though it is seen that sensations are noticed by something, including sensations of “my body.” Perhaps a bit more looking is needed here.
Thoughts of judgement affect how we feel, but are they true?
Is it true that you are unworthy? Is it true that there is someone here to be unworthy?
How is unworthiness felt?
What is behind the sensations?
Is there a feeler of sensations to which sensations happen?
Looking behind the sensations, behind seeing and hearing, and can’t find anything. Just hearing and seeing, and something noticing the sounds and sights. It feels like there is a something that feels “inside a body” but that body is just sensations right now. It doesn’t even have an inside. Sensations are just happening, including the sensations labeled “my body.” If I look closely, these “body” sensations are even changing every second (the mind makes the body into something solid and stable). There are bits of my body that aren’t even being felt right now.
Yes. All is happening in the present—sensations, thoughts, feelings.
Is there a center to which they all happen?
Can’t find one! It feels like there is one, but this is only an assumption. Looking at hearing alone right now, it is unclear if “I” am over where the sounds “are,” or whether I am “here,” where the sounds are seemingly being heard. Feeling wide and spread out.
Yes, yes, great stuff. Keep looking. And when Rowland comes back, check to see if that is not just a thought too, appearing effortlessly.
Yes, will keep noticing and checking. Rowland feels heavy again in the moment, but is he here? All that is found are sounds, sensations, sights, and thoughts. (Yes, Rowland is here) and something noticing all this that seems to be inside a body still. Always thoughts that cause the problems, cheeky blighters! Thank you so much, Ilona! There is a subtle loosening, although I need to keep looking, looking, looking.
Love, R.
Ilona: Thank you for sharing your experience. When it happens next time, see if you can welcome that fear when it is there and allow it to pass. This oneness that was seen is not here to scare you, it’s seeing that there are no boundaries, all is one, no separation.
If I am really honest, there is still a longing for peace and harmony, and an end to psychological suffering, and maybe the occasional blissful experience.
Peace is always here, it’s only the longing for peace that is covering it up. Look right now, underneath the thinking, behind experience, can you feel this peace? It’s not a state that comes and goes, but rather a background to that which comes and goes. If the mind wants peace, ask it, literally, what is in the way of feeling peace now. See what it is that the mind wants the most, then check if that wanting is the one thing that creates tension.
Also, examine this closely: what is the sensation that you call “Rowland”?
You say that sensations are noticed by something. That something is an assumption too. There is noticing happening, being aware, focusing on experiences, no subject is doing any of it, it’s just simply happening.
When there is a feeling that Rowland is back, see what is really happening that is labeled “Rowland.”
Here is something special for you, Bahiya Sutra [see http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/2008/01/ajahn-amaro-on-non-duality-and.html]. Write to me what you notice after spending time with it.
In the seen, there is only the seen,
in the heard, there is only the heard,
in the sensed, there is only the sensed,
in the cognized, there is only the cognized.
Thus you should see that
indeed there is no thing here;
this, Bahiya, is how you should train yourself.
Since, Bahiya, there is for you
in the seen, only the seen,
in the heard, only the heard,
in the sensed, only the sensed,
in the cognized, only the cognized,
and you see that there is no thing here,
you will therefore see that
indeed there is no thing there.
As you see that there is no thing there,
you are therefore located neither in the world of this,
nor in the world of that,
nor in any place
between the two.
This alone is the end of suffering.
Much love.
Rowland: Thank you so much, Ilona, for all your patience. Will spend a couple of days looking with your e-mail, reflecting on those beautiful lines, and get back to you. Love, R.
Rowland: I hope this e-mail finds you well. Below is my latest response.
As I look, it is clear that anything that is covering up the peace is thought-based. It is not the thoughts themselves that create disturbance, as much as belief in those thoughts. It is believing that the I-thought points to something real. It feels like this needs to be really, really clearly seen here. I have been writing a lot in my journal over the past couple of days, and noticing especially when “Rowland” comes up most strongly. Some jealousy arose in me yesterday in relation to a work colleague, which was interesting: almost immediately there was a sense of anger and guilt, as if this is not a “spiritual” emotion and that I should not be feeling it! But I had a good look at the one who was feeling jealous and couldn’t find him. Just thoughts/feelings/sensations coming and going. The thoughts/feelings persisted quite strongly, but I couldn’t find a central “I” to direct them. So nobody to take ownership. Nobody to say, “I am jealous”—but equally, nobody to say, “I shouldn’t feel jealous.” All these things just happening, just arising!
You say that sensations are noticed by something. That something is an assumption too. There is noticing happening, being aware, focusing on experiences, no subject is doing any of it, it’s just simply happening.
Yes, I think there is a tendency here to turn awareness into another object or person. When direct experience is looked at, there is nobody “behind” thoughts/feelings/perceptions. Nobody can be found, even though this feels fleeting at times. There is a noticing of what comes and goes, a presence (Is this the right word?) that is not changing, that is aware of change: that is not judging, that is always present. It is the sense of just being. It is always here. The I-thought comes and goes in it. Sensations of the body come and go in it. Sounds and sights come and go in it.
The Bahiya Sutra is very powerful, and I will keep working with it. What has come up with it has been the reminder that there is just this, just the hearing, the seeing, the touching, the thinking—all without an entity behind them. Everything just coming up now, now, now. There is certainly a “lightening” of the “Rowland” burden at the moment, a subtle sense of ease filtering in, even in the midst of a stressful teaching job. Just observing that even during crazy lessons, there are just sounds/sights/perceptions/thoughts coming and going. There is no “me” controlling them.
This feels like it is getting clearer but that I need to keep digging for it to become clearer still. It doesn’t quite feel yet like a “lived reality,” if you know what I mean. I have found writing/journaling very helpful by getting it all on paper. Looking on paper. I think it is important for me to stick with the simplicity of this. Thought here has such a tendency to conceptualize, to compare what one teacher says with another (about awareness, consciousness, and so forth), and it gets snared in loops of confused, anxious thinking! If I pause thought now, how complicated is any of this? How much does natural being need to “figure out”? It doesn’t, it feels like it just needs to settle in gently with a recognition of what is real. Thank you, as ever, Ilona, for all your compassion, guidance, and amazing patience! I really enjoyed your interview with the Wizard. [The interview is available at http://podcast.liberationunleashed.com/2011 /12/ilona-wizard-radio-show.] Love and light.
Ilona: Hey Rowland. Thank you for answers! Yes, you are staring right at it. Now do the math.
Is there a separate “self,” “I,” or “me” at all, in any shape or form?
Was there ever?
How does it feel to answer as you answer?
Much love.
Rowland: Thank you, as ever, for the amazing gift of your expression, Ilona! At the moment I feel rather confused, but will just write as it comes, without filters. On the one hand, it feels like I can’t find a separate self if I look for it. I can only find thoughts/feelings and I-thought sensations; yet, on the other hand, there still seems to be that self operating with a kind of “heaviness,” but I’m not sure how or where. I’m not sure if thought is simply trying to sabotage this in its familiar way: trying to perpetuate the process of “looking” to keep itself in business. It keeps insisting that I haven’t really seen this, or There is only mental understanding of this, not experiential. But is this just thought up to its old tricks? Not sure. Certainly, there is a subtle sense of transparency around “Rowland,” but there are still longer periods of contraction. Perhaps this is because of expectations here and an assumption that suffering will just drop away, or that there will be some grand change? This itself creates tension, I can see. So, there is both a feeling of being close to the Gate, and still being far away! And arising with this today is frustration, irritation with myself (Why can’t I get this clearly and quickly like other people?), anxiety, guilt that I am taking up your time. But this is just what is happening, I guess. At other points this week there has been much more lightness. I think perhaps I need to keep digging and looking.
When “I” comes up hypnotically, have a good look, see if it can be found.
The “Rowland” I-thoughts need to be seen as an illusion, so that they don’t keep snagging me when they come up. Perhaps I need to look a bit more closely at what a thought actually is. I have also decided to see a psychiatric nurse, and have made an appointment. I have had ongoing mental health issues for more than twenty years and seen various counselors, but I think now it needs to be addressed. Some of the mood swings I experience may simply be to do with a chemical imbalance in the brain, I suspect. Looking at the symptoms that seem to come up, it is a combination of bipolar and OCD, though I know these are just labels. However, there is less of a story attached to all of this now, less of a “me and my crazy emotions” story, and the various feelings that are triggered by it. It’s not “me.” But it’s a bit like having a broken leg, it just seems sensible to see a doctor! Interestingly, mental illness (a terrible phrase) itself is quite a powerful pointer: if looked at clearly, it shows that nobody at all is at the helm. This is just stuff happening! Thank you so much for all your patience and kindness, Ilona, and for sticking by me with all these ups and downs. It does feel like things are starting to fall away, however much the mind might try to resist.
Much love, R.
Ilona: Hi Rowland. Yes, you have noticed it right, thoughts trigger contractions and the more they are resisted the harder it gets. Don’t worry about how long it takes, it takes as long as needed. And it cannot be any other way for you. Trust that all that shows up is right.
I think perhaps I need to keep digging and looking.
When “I” comes up hypnotically, have a good look, see if it can be found.
The “Rowland” I-thoughts need to be seen as an illusion, so that they don’t keep snagging me when they come up. Perhaps I need to look a bit more closely at what a thought actually is.
Very good point.
What is a thought?
Where does it come from?
Can thoughts be controlled?
Is “I” a different thought? Is it more than a thought?
How about the thought “me”? Where does it point to?
If you take your finger and point now to this “me,” where is the finger pointing to?
This is just stuff happening!
Yes! It’s just stuff happening! Judging it as wrong or labeling it “illness”—does that make it so?
Big swings may be intense, but that, too, is just happening.
I cannot advise you about seeing a nurse or not, you know best what is right for you, just trust what feels like a big yes. Seeing through illusion does not change the character, nor what is happening, it just gives space for what shows up to play out without resistance.
You may also investigate if there is a mind.
What does the word “mind” point to?
Is there an invisible container of thoughts, memories, and hopes?
Or is it always just one thought after another, one thought at a time?
Thought says it is the mind thinking, but is there such a faculty as the mind doing thinking?
What do you see when you look here?
Much love.
Rowland: Thank you so much for your reply, dear Ilona! Sorry, I have taken a couple of days, but work has been especially busy, and I wanted to reflect clearly on the questions. Thank you too for your suggestion that I go with intuition in terms of seeing a doctor or nurse; it feels right at the moment.
There has been more lightness over the past couple of days, and less of a feeling of mood swings being “personal.” “Rowland” has felt lighter, less serious. Just keep checking in with what is real and present: sensations, perceptions, thoughts, feelings, awareness of these. Just stuff coming up presently. Now and now and now, what is actually here. A thought is an object in awareness, it comes and goes like the sound of my fingers on the keyboard right now. It stops and starts. The thought I like oranges arises, and then drops away. After/before each thought is emptiness, silence. Awareness is not more aware of a thought than it is of the voices that can be heard outside right now. So a thought could be seen like a kind of sensation. If a thought is no closer than a sound, what makes it “mine”? This is conditioned thinking. It just feels like it’s mine, feels like it refers to “me,” or describes “me,” or tells a story about a “me” with a past and a future, and with “shoulds” and “should nots,” with ongoing problems and worries. Is any of this real? It just feels like it is inside something called “my head,” but going on present evidence, is this true? There are sensations of a head, and thoughts presently arising, but there is no evidence that these are occurring inside those sensations. When a thought is looked at head-on, it can’t be “what I am,” as it is the object of noticing, like the sensations of this keyboard. It is just coming up neutrally in what is.
Where is the “I” to which thought refers? It exists nowhere except in thought.
If I were to point to “me,” I would probably point towards head sensations. But does the I-thought necessarily have anything to do with these?
You may also investigate if there is a mind.
What do you see when you look here?
Where is the mind?
“Mind” is just another thought. It points to nothing. Going on present evidence, there is no container of thoughts. Just one thought at a time. It just struck me that thoughts only really refer to themselves, only to other thoughts. They only seem to refer to a reality. But they don’t, as reality just is. Thoughts just are. Their meaning is only assumed. If the question “Where is the thinker?” is asked, there isn’t one to be found. Just thoughts coming and going. Thank you again!
Much love, R.
Ilona: Hi Rowland. Oh yes, you’re seeing it. Thoughts and sensory experiences don’t touch each other. Thoughts are only referring to other thoughts. It’s all thoughts about other thoughts. And this is also part of experience, part of what is happening.
How does it feel to see this?
What do you see now when you look at the character Rowland?
Is Rowland telling the story?
Is he driving what is happening?
Is there an actor that plays Rowland?
Is he the experiencer?
Show me what you see.
Big smile and hug.
Rowland: Thank you, dear Ilona! I hope this e-mail finds you well. I wrote quite a bit in my journal yesterday in response to your e-mail. I hope it makes sense, as I wrote fast!
How does it feel to see this?
It feels freeing to see this! There is less heaviness if the thought “I” is attached to sensations—it is just one more thing being noticed in awareness, one more sensation. Looking again now.
To which sensations does the I-thought refer?
Thought says “my body” because only “I can feel them,” but where is this “I”? Where is the evidence? Right now, the sounds of the car outside, the birds chirping, the cat crunching his biscuits, his claws now clicking across the floor; these sounds are just as close as body sensations. There isn’t really any “close,” because there isn’t really any “far away.”
And with eyes closed; is there a distinction between body sensations and chair?
Despite the insistence of thought, it is impossible to say where “body” sensations end and “chair” sensations begin. It is all one flow. There is at the moment a lightness to seeing this, a subtle expansiveness and everything appearing equally here, in awareness. Listening to the birds right now; these sounds are inside awareness, the thoughts “I” or “Rowland” are inside awareness, the colors of my cat are inside awareness, but none of this is what I am. And is there an inside? It is all just stuff happening, coming and going, with a changelessly aware backdrop. (Is there even a backdrop?) Awareness is not an identity or person, it is just an ongoing, utterly pristine, noticing. More of a verb? Not a solid, or even ethereal, thing. But it is always here. Still flip-flopping with this, but seeing, too.
Where is the “I” that is flip-flopping?
Can’t be found. Just sensations, feelings, coming and going, some thought labels “pleasant,” some “unpleasant.”
Where is this “I”?
My wife has just come downstairs and words (which can’t be seen!) are coming out of something called a “mouth,” these words are just happening. Where is the “I” who is speaking? So much love everywhere! Only thought seems to prevent this from being seen.
What do you see now when you look at the character Rowland?
Is Rowland telling the story?
Is he driving what is happening?
Is there an actor that plays Rowland?
Show me what you see.
Rowland is an interesting character in the play of life! Loving, complicated, funny, warm, distant, shy, insecure, anxious, expansive, manic, withdrawn, compassionate, selfish, too sensitive, insensitive, addictive, troubled, frustrated…a bit of a colorful, rich mess! Suffering kicks in with the assumption that this is who I am, and that there is an “I” who can make things better, or improve, or be more spiritual, or could have been or done better. Suffering also kicks in with too much investment in any of these labels (Where is “withdrawn” or “too sensitive” in reality?). But there is nothing here other than sensations (even thoughts, feelings, perceptions could be seen as just things being sensed). Just what is coming up. And coming up. And coming up. What are the implications of this? It seems important to see these in reality. Might look into this a bit more. What exactly is this freedom? So “Rowland” does feel lighter at times—definitely. I feel like I am staring at the Gate, but then thought tells me I am not, that this is just intellectual! That I am just saying the right things, but it’s just thought up to its old tricks! Although the “I” cannot be found, thought still seems to be potent and hypnotic at times.
Big smile and hug back to you! Thank you deeply for your amazing compassion and patience.
Ilona: Hi Rowland. I enjoyed reading that. Nice observations.
You say thoughts say that it’s just intellectual. Do you believe this thought?
Take a look, is there a Gate to cross?
See what comes up when you ask the question “Is there an I?,” rather than “Where is this I?”
Much love.
Rowland: Thank you, Ilona! When I ask the question “Is there an I?,” the thought comes up, No, there isn’t, but it still feels at times like there is one.
It is definitely being seen through more and more. What seems to happen at the moment is flip-flopping between a sense of lightness and ease and then something triggers conditioning, and the “I” solidifies again (or seems to). Fear and guilt often seem particularly to trigger the I-sense (the two emotions that have perhaps caused me the most difficulty since childhood).
For example, yesterday I happened across some writings on karma and the “unimaginable pains” of the lower realms in Mahayana Buddhism. (I think other forms of Buddhism speak of lower or hell realms as well, don’t they?) This generated self-centered fear, even panic; and the “I” popped up immediately and a terror of experiencing this “myself” (What might “my” karmic debt be?), and also of this happening to others. Obsessive personal thoughts began churning and ruminating on past deeds, on karma. I could almost feel the “I” feeding on this! Real contraction. And then the thoughts, What if this is correct? What if there are terrifying hell realms? How can I know for sure? This began just digging away at me. It’s a bit like spiritual hypochondria!
But I’m sitting with the fear, and the guilt, and the uncomfortable emotions, and the feeling of contraction. I’m having a good look at them. Who is feeling this fear? This guilt? Who is suffering? These emotions cover up the simple contentment of the present moment. They are thought’s attempts to keep the story going. It doesn’t want to be seen through! But are the emotions actually present? No, just labels imposed on raw sensation.
There is a bit of relief as I type this, as I look at what I’ve written. I think I need to keep away from spiritual websites and forums and stick to present-moment, direct experience. There is so much stuff out there, so many concepts, theories, perspectives, beliefs. What is true now?
Ilona: Okay, consider this: there is no “who.” It’s a construct of language, useful in communicating and storytelling. But, there is no “who” outside of language. If language was made just of verbs alone, such questions as “who” or “what” would not arise.
“Who” points to a separate entity, subject, but is there a subject that experiences or is experiencing happening?
What is true in your experience?
Is there a “who”?
Is there a “what”?
Is there a gap between perceiver and perceived?
Is there someone or something that feels guilt?
Are sensations of contraction happening to some perceiver?
Is seeing happening to a seer?
Sending love.
Rowland: Thank you, dear Ilona! The Gateless Gate seems nearer and nearer.
Okay, consider this: there is no “who.” It’s a construct of language, useful in communicating and storytelling. But, there is no “who” outside of language.
This is becoming clearer and clearer, Ilona. Without language, where are any problems?
If language was made just of verbs alone, such questions as “who” or “what” would not arise.
There would be such freedom too. It is I/you/they that creates problems, responsibilities, debts, pressures, shoulds, should nots, conflicts, difficulties, worries. Without these, there would just be the spontaneous arising of sensations. No judging. No ongoing, painful stories. Without the I-thought, where is the person with a problematic past/present/future? With obligations? This is real freedom and just needs to be totally felt and seen, I think. Really felt and seen. At the moment it feels like there are glimpses of the light.
“Who” points to a separate entity, subject, but is there a subject that experiences or is experiencing happening?
Looking now, there definitely isn’t one. It is just not there. Throughout the day I pause to have a look—particularly when difficult thoughts or memories are coming up—and there are only the thoughts, feelings, sensations. I can’t find a center to them. Who is there to believe that thoughts are true?
What is true in your experience?
Is there a “who”?
Is there a “what”?
Is there a gap between perceiver and perceived?
Is there someone or something that feels guilt?
Are sensations of contraction happening to some perceiver?
Is seeing happening to a seer?
There is no “who,” and not even a “what.” It is difficult to say anything beyond “there is noticing of sensations.” There is noticing of what is coming up right now. A gap between perceiver and perceived cannot be found either.
What would hearing be without the object of hearing? Where does “hearing” end and the sound of voices begin? Where does the “seeing” of this computer end and the computer itself begin? Nothing can be separated out.
No feeler of guilt or fear can be found—just thoughts, anxious sensations, presently arising. But none at the moment. My sense is that I am seeing this pretty clearly now, but that conditioning/patterns just need to be thoroughly seen through, as they come up with such force. Guilt and fear have been such strong emotions since childhood. Just need to keep questioning assumptions and thoughts.
Love and light!
Ilona: Yes, right here, spot on. Let this just settle in. Keep noticing and looking. Focus on what is already obvious; instead of looking for what is not there, look at what is.
Is there anything, anyone that owns conditioning?
Sending love.
Rowland: Thank you, Ilona. Yes, I think I need to settle in with this, to keep looking, to get really clear. What I am finding at the moment is that there is no “I” to be found and there are periods of lightness as this is seen, and then thought seems to come in with such hypnotic and compelling force, it almost feels overpowering! It feels so hard not to listen to the self-critical thought-voice, particularly when it starts drawing on painful stories and memories. As you suggest, focus on what is real: sensations, colors, sounds—all arising right now in awareness. Everything else is story. This is so clear as I write this. Thank you for sticking with me, Ilona. I am so deeply grateful to you.
Love, R.
Ilona: Great stuff.
Now look, is there anyone who gets lost in a story or is it just more story arising?
Examine the voice in the head. Is there a listener to which it is talking?
Does the voice know what is true or does it thinks that it knows?
Much love.
Rowland: Thanks, Ilona! Hope you are enjoying the sunny weather! I sat quietly yesterday and spent some time inquiring into thought.
Yes, the idea that there is anyone who gets lost in a story is just more story! There are stories that arise; thoughts, memories, images, but (if I am really honest) nobody there to take ownership of them. They are not “my” stories, “my” memories. Thoughts appear, like sensations and perceptions appear, in impersonal awareness.
So there is no need to “do” anything with thoughts any more than there is a need to “do” anything with the sound of a blackbird on a roof. The key for me at the moment is not to be afraid of, or frustrated by, thought as if it is waiting in the wings, and might spring out at any moment to hypnotize me and draw me in! I think I still attribute too much power to thought. I still get irritated sometimes that thought is so busy that I rarely achieve a state of “spiritual stillness.” But, of course, the more I want a quiet mind, the more it will elude me. I spent much of yesterday feeling light and unencumbered with “me”: it was so clear that life, no matter what is arising, does not know worries and problems. This is just the natural way of being! Tomorrow I have my appointment with the doctor to discuss “my” (!) OCD/bipolar traits, but again, this is not an identity. Just stuff that is arising and needs to be looked at! Take care. Lots of love and gratitude.
Ilona: Nice! I can see that the veil is lifting.
Look at thought itself. How does it happen that it gets believed?
What is a belief?
How does it work?
Is any belief true?
If so, what makes it true?
Sending love.
Rowland: Attention and energy go to the thought, such that it is believed and becomes “true.” But any thought is a belief, and therefore no thought is really “true.” Even memory thoughts, which seem to be “more” than thoughts, which seem to solidify the separate self (I did such and such… , I used to do x, y, z… , and so forth), even these are beliefs, as they rely on the reality of the “I.”
It hit me a couple of days ago that any thought which contains a statement about “I” is ultimately a fiction. It’s like the implications of this freedom are beginning to trickle through with the mind not wanting them to be seen, wanting to keep the prison running, however subtly. Even the thought I bought a bottle of water yesterday relies on three assumptions: that there is an “I”; that there is a separate, self-contained, independent object (a bottle of water); and that there is, in reality, something concrete (“back there”) called “yesterday.” But these are all just assumptions.
All there is, is what is happening right now. Thoughts, sensations, feelings, arising in unchanging awareness. Those thoughts/feelings/sensations aren’t necessarily related to one another as an “entity” either; this is another assumption. What does the thought I am typing necessarily have to do with the physical sensations of typing, beyond the fact that this is all experienced in/by awareness? This is so freeing! If no thought is believed, there is only natural freedom. I need to keep coming back to this, seeing this, even though there is no “I” to do this (!). That is just more of the prison.
I found myself yesterday getting into the trap of Should I or should I not practice? and reading what different teachers say—strong arguments both ways. And then thoughts would arise like: It’s okay to practice if I am not expecting anything from it. But how do I know if I am expecting something or not? Again, all this suffering/confusion/frustration is thought. All of it.
I will continue to sit quietly in the evening, inquiring and looking until I don’t. I just enjoy it.
Take care, Ilona! It has been lovely seeing the sunshine over the last few days, the countryside bristling with butterflies and honeybees!
Love and light.
Ilona: Oh, I love this warm sunshine! And I have the sea five minutes down the road. Really nice to feel warm. Yes, yes, yes, this is very clear. Practice or no practice? How about both. Practice happens when it happens and then it’s not practice, but arising in awareness. Just meditate. Expectations, too, are only thoughts about thoughts. Yes, let this settle and enjoy the ride. Can you say you are ready for the final questions?
Much love.
Rowland: Thanks so much, Ilona, glad you are enjoying the sun! Could I possibly stay with this for a week or two, and get back to you? I feel like I still need to settle in with the seeing, to really “get” the implications of it. We are off to Norfolk tomorrow until Monday. Have a brilliant weekend!
Much love.
Ilona: Sure, Rowland, get back to me when it’s the right time. For now, have a wonderful time!
Sending lots of love!
Rowland: Hi Ilona. How are you? Hope you have had a great two weeks, and have been enjoying the sunshine by the sea! We are off tomorrow to the Whitby Coast for a long weekend.
The sea is such a good reminder, always present and yet never the same from moment to moment! A mass of beautiful, shifting, changing sensations, ceaselessly tumbling into and out of new forms and yet always “the sea”!
Over the last couple of weeks, I have certainly felt more freedom and spaciousness, and thoughts have a bit less “sting.” Much more of a sense of just being here with what arises. Rowland is far less solid than he used to be! Thoughts/situations do come up and seem to “snag” me, but with a bit of looking, I can’t find anyone who is being “snagged” or “caught.”
It is like I am kind of growing into freedom, like a child taking baby steps, two steps forward, two back, three forward, two back.
On Tuesday I saw a consultant who told me (as an initial assessment) that he thought I had a combination of OCD and borderline personality disorder (BPD), which I have always suspected. It’s interesting, though: these are clearly just labels now, nothing to be owned or taken personally. It is just what is happening. No need to worry about what will happen in the future either, as this will also just be what is happening! Sensations arising in a peaceful sea of awareness. When the consultant told me what he thought was going on with me, there was just a calm (even slightly amused) watching of the situation. Nothing really to get caught up in. Thank you so much for everything, Ilona, you guys at Liberation Unleashed do a truly amazing job holding people’s hands and guiding them so generously and wisely and patiently as they begin to see what is actually real and happening. To be honest, there is no way to express gratitude that is adequate, but thank you!
Much love, Rowland.
Ilona: Hi Rowland, So delightful to read your e-mail. I can see that relaxation is taking place, and that puts a huge smile on my face. Okay, so you say that Rowland is less solid. Good. Now let’s look deeper.
Where is the solid part?
What is here that indicates that Rowland is here?
What is Rowland made of?
How do you know?
Where is Rowland now?
Can you get rid of him?
Do you need to get rid of him?
What comes up here?
Much love.
Rowland: Thanks so much for your reply, Ilona!
The only “solidity” Rowland seems to have is, from time to time, in thought/memory. Otherwise he can’t be found. And sometimes thought seems to add itself to uncomfortable sensations/feelings, which creates more of a feeling of a solid “me.”
Over the past couple of days, my mood has gone up and down in quite intense ways—irritable, anxious, talkative, and so forth—and sometimes these mood swings are accompanied by automatic resistant or judgemental thinking (This shouldn’t be happening after all this inquiry!; This is OCD/BPD stuff; I’m crazy!; I’m so far from enlightened!; There shouldn’t be so much thinking!; and so forth). But is any of it happening to a “me”?
However uncomfortable sensations might be, they aren’t happening to a “me.” There is no “me” or “Rowland” to be found, except (seemingly) in the next thought. There is no “me” making anything happen, or being responsible for what is happening, or taking charge of it, or directing it. There is no “me” to make it go away. If the question “Who is thinking?” is asked, no thinker/doer can be found, just thoughts popping up spontaneously, referring to other thoughts.
Thank you!
Love, R.
Ilona: Thank you for answers and yay! Yes, the thoughts can come up, but they don’t need to stick. Just like weather changes, so do the mood and sensations; when you see that it’s just happening, there is no more suffering over “unpleasant” events. They come and go. No need to hold on to pleasant events either, they come and go too. There is freedom in experiencing this impermanence. So…
Can you say that, yes, it’s clear that “I” is not an entity in charge?
If not, what else can we look at?
Much love.
Rowland: Hi Ilona. Thank you so much, as ever, for your patience! I would say it is about 99.9 percent clear now that no entity is in charge, that sensations, and events, come and go.
Even in the midst of “difficult” moods it is clear that “I” am not causing them, or causing “difficult” events. Everything just flows in and out, like the tide, in the sea of awareness. Sometimes thoughts/stories seem to hook (which I guess is inevitable after decades of conditioning), but with a quick question—like “Where is this ‘I’?”—the thoughts can be seen for what they are: impersonal, not referring or belonging to anyone, not coming out of (or going) anywhere.
The one thing I would like to look at just a little more is time/memory, which can still hypnotize “me” most strongly; it is the one thing that still does (although not nearly as much as it used to). Painful memories resurface and powerfully seem to construct the “I” to which they refer. What is the best way to really see through these? I feel like I am so nearly there, so nearly ready for the final questions!
Take care.
Love and light.
Ilona: Great! Almost there. Okay, look at memories this way: they arise, so they can be looked at, feelings felt and released. The repressed memories are charged with unwanted feelings. The more these feelings get released, the less memories will surface. In a while they won’t trigger feelings anymore. So, instead of resisting these memories, try the opposite. Invite them to come up.
A good way to work with this is by writing. Draw a long line. On the left put a dot, your birthday. On the right put a dot, this is now. Then mark the time line and search for painful memories, mark them all on the line. Write down each one of them. Welcome each one of them into this presence and see if there is a theme running through. Examine and answer these questions:
Was there a separate self in these situations?
Could anything have been different at any of those times?
How does a memory arise?
How is a memory experienced?
Is there anything here, right now, that owns these memories?
At the end, once these questions are answered, go to each memory and give a hug to young Rowland. Tell him that you love him very much and always will. Write me a report on what happens.
Much love your way.
Rowland: Hi Ilona. Thank you so much. I think I am basically there!
Below are my answers to the questions, which I wrote over the weekend (and I added one more question: “Is there a past back there in which events happened?”). Hope they make sense.
It is an interesting time: just as I am about to see a psychologist after the diagnosis of BPD, the very self seems to be evaporating! But the conditioning does still need seeing through and working out, as it will continue to come up and cause suffering. Painful behaviors/feelings/compulsions here, but nobody around to take delivery of them!
The first thing I noticed was that, stretching right back to childhood, lots of memories have to do with shame, guilt, anger, or resentment. Almost as far back as I can remember. Saying how much I love the “young Rowland” after the inquiry brought up tears, and a sense of natural compassion (it became clear how little “self-compassion” has really been experienced here in this lifetime).
Was there a separate self in these situations?
No separate self in any situation, nobody controlling, or guiding, or who could have acted any differently. No real “situations,” just a flow of passing, never-to-be-repeated sensations. Is there a separate self here now, writing this? No. Fingers on a keyboard, sound of the keys, cars outside, breathing, thoughts popping up from time to time, arguing against this, but where is the one thinking? Silence.
Could anything have been different at any of those times?
Nothing could have been different because nobody, anywhere, is in control. Where is any “person” in those situations? Therefore, where are such things as guilt/blame/debt/issues still needing attention and so forth? Who would be going back into the “past”? Experience is only, effortlessly, now.
How does a memory arise?
A memory arises, completely spontaneously, in the present moment. Nobody is remembering. There is no “rememberer.”
How is a memory experienced?
A memory is always experienced now. But it is like a passing sensation, it is not personal. There is no evidence that it even refers back to anything other than another thought, so why get weighed down by something that doesn’t have any solid, independent reality? Who is there to “be” weighed down? Do any present sensations have any past or future? None. They are always fresh, history-less. (For example, the sensations labeled “foot” are all presently occurring for the first time, not referring back to a story of “previous sensations of foot”!) What is has no historical baggage. It is lighter than light, in truth. This is how life lives itself, whether this is seen or not.
Is there anything here, right now, that owns these memories?
Nobody owns those memories. A thought cannot own another thought. No memory refers to anything actual/substantial—just another thought, threaded through the I-thought. Presently arising sensations do not own or hold on to anything at all. Life itself is now. Being is now. If the memory/thought arises, such as I did such and such or They did such and such, to whom does this thought refer? There is no “I”/“they” to “do” or to “not do” anything, to claim or blame. Physical sensations/sense perceptions do not make an “I.” Nor is there a “they” or “he”/“she”/“you” out there responsible for anything. Sensations/perceptions do not act, they just arise spontaneously in awareness.
Is there a past back there in which events happened?
Where is “the past”? Thought paints a very convincing picture, but the past only arises now in thought. It doesn’t exist “somewhere else” as if it were waiting for thought to “reveal” it. It is re-created moment by moment, and each thought is totally new. There is no past to be “gone back into,” and nobody to “need” to do this, either. Everything is spontaneously, innocently, coming and going, coming and going, never to be repeated or “carried around” or taken personally. Hope this makes sense! Thank you again for everything, Ilona, I think I am ready for the final questions! Much love.
Ilona: Wonderful to hear! Love your answers. Looks like the past has been seen through. And here are some new questions for you. Please answer in full, when ready.
Much love.
Some time later…
Rowland: Hi Ilona. Below are my answers! Thank you so, so very much, and please let me know if I can do anything to help in the future. It is an interesting time: with BPD, “difficult” feelings/thoughts/behaviors inevitably will come up; and there will be days, I am sure, where the separate self will seem to reassert itself (although, who knows). But right now, Rowland can’t be found. I would love to write something, at some point, on mental illness and seeing through the separate self. Perhaps it would help others who find themselves in a similar situation.
1. Is there a separate entity “self,” “me,” “I” at all, anywhere, in any way, shape, or form? Was there ever?
No, there is no separate entity, no “I,” “me,” “you” anywhere. There can’t be, as separation cannot be found. Just the free play of sensations and perceptions in awareness: nobody is controlling, directing, or shaping it. Even thought that insists “it” is doing something, or acting independently in some way, is spontaneously arising. Thought can be very hypnotic, seductive, after a lifetime of conditioning, but when looked at, all of its claims are empty. Even the thoughts Thought is very seductive or There is a lifetime of conditioning are empty, not ultimately true. Not only is there no separate entity, there never has been. And even more than this, strictly speaking, there never has been anything. Sensations and perceptions arise spontaneously, moment by moment, and for the first time. Each sensation, including the sensation of thought, is totally free of historical baggage. The “past” (like the “future”) is just another spontaneously arising thought. It has no substance. And if there is no continuity in time, where is the separate self?
2. Explain in detail what the illusion of separate self is, when it starts, and how it works from your own experience. Describe it fully as you see it now.
The separate self-illusion begins in early childhood (perhaps around the age of two): A baby is born without any story, sense of individuation, sense of “problems,” and so on. It doesn’t even conceive of itself as a “baby”! What we refer to as “baby” is (from the baby’s perspective) just a dance of sensations without end, only ever in the moment, beautiful and borderless and immediate. The separate self is the illusion that one is an individual human—apart from others, apart from the world, but with control, volition, past, and future. The body becomes a historical boundary, rather than just a present play of perception; thought becomes “my thought” and “thoughts about me” and begins to reference an imagined self-center. Life becomes heavy, burdensome, loses its lightness as responsibility kicks in, and gets heavier and heavier.
The separate self, as it (apparently) grows older, feels more and more distant from the world/others, more and more defective, and less and less able to live up to standards imposed from a perceived “outside,” and also from an apparent “inside.” In my experience, life becomes very difficult: pushing harder and harder against the tide becomes the norm. The “inner” narrative for some apparent individuals becomes more painful with each passing decade, with increased “history” and concern about “future.”
What began as a spontaneous dance becomes more like the trudge of a prisoner in a chain gang, who has no idea when he/she may be released—or if he/she ever will be free.
Spirituality can then add to this difficult story: as we begin to read “spiritual” books, we might think we are returning to the dance, but often we are adding more rules, obligations, and “future” concern. We miss the fact that the dance has been happening all along, we have just missed it! The chain gang is a dream; the chains are not real. The dance is. The dance is happening.
3. How does it feel to see this? What is the difference from before you started this dialogue? Please report from the past few days.
Although there are still challenges here—I have been diagnosed with a psychological disorder and am undergoing treatment—life is lighter, easier. There isn’t nearly as much guilty rumination, or anxious forward thinking. Life is taking care of itself; and there is nobody at the wheel. What is happening is happening. We may label bits of it “painful,” but these are just words. Everything is just arising spontaneously, so why worry, why regret? Why look backward, why look forward? Life itself never does. From moment to moment, moods might shift, thought might come back in and (seemingly) try to take center stage again, asserting the unhappy “me,” but if this is looked for, it cannot be found. And this is all just happening in the only way it can. All of it.
4. What was the last bit that pushed you over? What made you look?
For me, one of the most powerful recognitions was seeing the insubstantiality of the past, and of time generally. Memory, perhaps more than anything, was sustaining the unhappy narrative of “me.” Seeing that there is only ever now, but actually seeing it and investigating it rather than just reading about it, was important. Time is created moment by moment, and fades moment by moment.
5. Do you decide, intend, choose, control events in life? Do you make anything happen? Give examples from your experience.
No, there is nobody to decide, choose, or control events in life. We cannot even say life chooses/controls/decides, as that would be to personify life, and give it an agenda. There is nobody here to decide and I don’t think I can even say that “decisions happen,” as the word “decision” still sounds too definitive, too much like there is a separate agent in the mix. Rather, events happen—whether those events are thoughts, feelings, perceptions. A so-called decision is just another event, coming and going in the flow of awareness. I am not making these words happen now, they are appearing as I type on the screen; but they are just happening, as are the thoughts that are running alongside them, as is the sound of cars, as is the sound of my cat’s claws on the dining-room floor. Where is the “me” in any of this? Why should thoughts be about “me” when the sounds of the cars clearly are not? Why the division? It is the same with a psychological disorder: I have not made this happen, nor has anyone else. It is a happening, too; and even to call it a “psychological disorder” presumes a past history which, actually, when looked for, cannot be found. It is just another series of constantly shifting, changing events, and there is no way of knowing what will happen. Who would want to know, anyway? What a beautiful mystery!
6. Anything to add?
I would mainly like to add my deep, deep gratitude to Ilona and everyone at the Liberation Unleashed website: what you guys do is generous and important beyond words, and a true outpouring of love. Thank you!
Ilona: Wow. That is as clear as it gets. Thank you for wonderful answers and the whole process. I can already see how this has potential to help people that go through the same story as you. I would love to share this with readers of my blog, with your permission, of course. I don’t need to use your real name, let me know what you prefer. I am really, really happy for you. And I know you will be just fine. Your mind is not broken, it’s perfect and you express clearly and simply; I can see, you would be a good guide. Sending you a big hug and lots of love.
Rowland: Hey Ilona. Thanks for your lovely e-mail! No worries at all with posting our dialogue on your blog. I am sure it will be okay to use “Rowland.” It would be really nice to help others, too. Take care, and have a great evening! Much love.
A few months later, I asked Rowland to share how he was doing. Here is what he wrote:
Since finishing the Liberation Unleashed investigation with dear Ilona, a number of things have become much clearer. The presence of a substantial, separate entity called “Rowland” has become very difficult indeed to find: it is evident, when looked at, that thoughts like I and me float through experiencing, like leaves do in the wind on a delicious autumn day. Where and what is this “me”? There is a looking back and…silence. Just this. And where is the one who decides, controls, chooses, wills? He, too, is a phantom, a thought’s thought, perhaps.
But equally, challenges have arisen (and do arise). Even when it is clear that there is no separate “I” to speak of, thought can still surge up with hypnotic force, asking to be looked at, seen through. Some days this happens often—in times of stress, for example—and on other days, less so. But who is there to want or will this otherwise? Only “I” can have a problem with the arising of an “I.”
It has also been interesting in that, simultaneous with the initial seeing-through of Rowland, I have been diagnosed with a mood disorder and am about to begin a course of psychological treatment as an outpatient. Old patterns and conditioning have flared painfully at times, addictions, mood swings, racing thoughts, manic overactivity giving way at points to sloth and frightening depression. But with all this said, there is certainly much greater acceptance than before: less of a need to turn it into a personal melodrama of cause and effect. It’s happening, like storms sometimes happen, and sunny days too. There is nobody, really, choosing it or not choosing it.
And—weirdly—there is something kind of beautiful in the unpredictable, whirligig patterning of labels and thoughts; there is no reaching for judgements. In a way, (what is called) mental illness is a great teacher: it is a reminder that we are not separate from life; that there is nobody home to dictate the course of events; that the wind will blow as it blows. Maybe we’ll like it, maybe not! But who’s—and what’s—not to like? Hmm.
There has also been a definite heart opening: a sense of overwhelming love at times for (seemingly) others, whether animals, humans, or even (so-called) inanimate objects. Everything shines if we look. It does. Even, or especially, when it rains. It feels like neither the words “personal” nor “impersonal” are quite right. Nor even the word “love.” It seems like it is more about just seeing what is really there, what is really happening, in every blessed moment.
I continue to meditate, sit, rest, investigate, but with more spontaneity and curiosity now, and less of a sense of Damn! I just need to get there! It is wonderful just to look and see what is right here, right now. To see what is shining always, imperturbably, in and through the whole show.
Thank you, Ilona! The work you guys do is so much appreciated. I hope to be able to return the gift soon.