# Research supplement quotations

All 28 translated quotations in the research supplement.

All passages below are English translations. Exact Russian source text and both sets of character ranges are retained in the matching JSON register.

## Q01 · A12

English range: 1679–1736; end excluded.

```text
Content, accuracy, and the grounds for claims may differ.
```

## Q02 · A14

English range: 198–257; end excluded.

```text
This reply contains no separate demonstration of that kind.
```

## Q03 · A31

English range: 899–920; end excluded.

```text
Text belongs in text.
```

## Q04 · A21

English range: 110–126; end excluded.

```text
The result is me
```

## Q05 · N1-01

English range: 0–39; end excluded.

```text
I did the self-check
Want to discuss it
```

## Q06 · N1-02

English range: 762–1167; end excluded.

```text
I'm interested in how it went for you, not just the intellectual conclusion. What happened when you reached the instruction “find the letter ‘I’ apart from any written instance of it”? Did you try to find something, did an answer come up such as “here I am,” “consciousness,” or “a sense of self”—or did it become clear fairly quickly that any such continuation was already answering a different question?
```

## Q07 · N1-03

English range: 0–140; end excluded.

```text
The first thing that comes up
That's me - inside me
But then it becomes clear that the lines and letters and even the sound aren't inside me
```

## Q08 · N1-05

English range: 0–136; end excluded.

```text
No, it points more toward substitution
I - not I, as stupid as that sounds
It's a way of designating that very quickly became everything
```

## Q09 · N1-06

English range: 151–475; end excluded.

```text
It seems you've noticed not just that “a word is not the same as a thing,” but a stronger effect: the word “I” appropriates everything that is happening—sensation, thought, choice, history, body, voice—so quickly and automatically that it stops being perceived as a pointer and starts to seem like the very center of it all.
```

## Q10 · N1-06

English range: 876–1260; end excluded.

```text
That's why your phrase “it's a way of designating that very quickly became everything” seems to me the most interesting part. You can look directly at how it becomes “everything”: a sensation arises → almost instantly, “I feel”; a thought → “I think”; a decision → “I decided.” The event itself and its grammatical appropriation merge so quickly that the separation is barely noticed.
```

## Q11 · N1-07

English range: 0–53; end excluded.

```text
Everything's the same but without I and without words
```

## Q12 · N1-08

English range: 0–150; end excluded.

```text
Yes. That gives us a fairly clear difference: nothing has disappeared from what is happening—only appropriation and verbal packaging have disappeared.
```

## Q13 · N1-08

English range: 781–1004; end excluded.

```text
What's more interesting is this: when everything remains the same, but without “I” and without words, is there a sense that what is happening still belongs to someone? Or does “belongs” itself also appear only after naming?
```

## Q14 · N1-09

English range: 0–125; end excluded.

```text
Like the word I, the word ownership falls away and then this (you/I/ another word) is everything and nothing at the same time
```

## Q15 · N1-10

English range: 515–832; end excluded.

```text
And it seems to me that what you're describing now is less a metaphysical conclusion—“I am literally everything and nothing”—than a change in the very structure of experience: when “I” and “belongs to me” fall away, no separate owner of what is happening can be found—but what is happening itself doesn't go anywhere.
```

## Q16 · N1-10

English range: 1018–1239; end excluded.

```text
What I'm curious about is this: when you return to ordinary things after this self-check—talking, choosing, moving, thinking—does “I” return as a useful tool, or does it once again feel like the same center it was before?
```

## Q17 · N1-11

English range: 0–73; end excluded.

```text
More often as a center, but every so often a state of substitution arises
```

## Q18 · N1-12

English range: 0–265; end excluded.

```text
It seems both modes are present for you at once now: most of the time, “I” gathers experience around itself again as the familiar center, while sometimes it becomes noticeable that this center is not what is happening itself, but a very quick way of designating it.
```

## Q19 · N1-13

English range: 0–31; end excluded.

```text
What comes next in the document
```

## Q20 · N1-14

English range: 989–1272; end excluded.

```text
The ending is very uncompromising: “Text belongs in text.” Neither “I” nor a description of “I” becomes you; and the word “you” is, once again, a written word. No further answer is required. Then: “A word does not become what it names”—and “Close this page.” [PDF: p. 2, lines 40–45]
```

## Q21 · N1-14

English range: 1515–1663; end excluded.

```text
If you want, we can now go through the second page line by line and look at what each phrase does specifically to your experience of “substitution.”
```

## Q22 · N1-15

English range: 0–5; end excluded.

```text
Let's
```

## Q23 · N1-16

English range: 0–140; end excluded.

```text
Let's. We'll go through the second page not as a “teaching,” but in terms of what each line does to the substitution you've already noticed.
```

## Q24 · PUBLIC

English range: 729–816; end excluded.

```text
This is a constructed sequence, not a description of what every reader must experience.
```

## Q25 · N1-16

English range: 142–669; end excluded.

```text
“I / the one who speaks / consciousness / feeling”—here the document shows a typical chain of replacement. You couldn't find “I” as a letter apart from a written instance of it, and the mind almost instantly offers: “well, then it's the one who speaks,” then “consciousness,” then “feeling.” But the text immediately cuts this move short: this is not a necessary sequence of experiences, just a series of possible explanations; a word's explanatory function does not make it anything other than a word. [PDF: p. 2, lines 19–26]
```

## Q26 · N1-16

English range: 1855–2154; end excluded.

```text
This matters right now because you and I have already started using the words “substitution,” “center,” and “designation.” The document seems to be saying: fine, but don't let the word “substitution” take the place of what you saw directly. Otherwise, the same operation would happen all over again.
```

## Q27 · N1-16

English range: 2771–3075; end excluded.

```text
And more strongly still: stopping the explanation is called neither proof nor a special state. [PDF: p. 2, lines 38–39] So, according to the document itself, the moments you describe as a state of substitution shouldn't be turned into a state that needs to be maintained, deepened, or considered “truer.”
```

## Q28 · N1-16

English range: 4113–4338; end excluded.

```text
To my mind, the most vivid part for you now is precisely the moment when the ordinary “I” becomes the center again. Because there you can stop looking for an answer and simply see the mechanism of substitution itself at work.
```