Requesting a guide, please - ThinqueTank

[ThinqueTank]

Hi, my name is Rhett. I’m not quite sure where I stand. I read most of the Gateless Gatecrashers pdf on this site which helped a lot (I think), read two of Jed McKenna’s books and one of Tolle’s. Don’t quite exactly know what to look for.

-What brings you to Liberation Unleashed?
I understand gatecrashing isn't quite therapy, but I'm hoping crashing to the other side will help me not take things so personally. Especially failures. I've also been haunted by feelings of "this" not being all there is to Life.

-What is your background in terms of seeking and inquiry?
As of right now, just what was explained in the first section. I'll try and sum up where I am right now:
If I understand correctly, “no self” means that Life lives through “me,” who is just a character like a tree. “I” attaches to experiences and labels them “my experiences” when they just belong to Life only, period. Is this correct?
When “I” don’t like something, is that just Life determining that this body doesn’t like that something? That Life speaks through me is the main point?
I try to practice this, but it seems forced and I usually end up resorting back to my old self: the one with my interests, my hobbies, etc. If I understand this correctly, they're not really “my” interests, hobbies, etc. They’re simply a character, “me,” enjoying doing what “I’m” doing. But in the moment, I’m not thinking about that. Here's what I mean more specifically:
If I’m playing piano and get frustrated with trying to play a few notes or studying classes and the material is tough, I get frustrated with myself. Afterwards I can step back and look at it like: “It wasn’t me who was frustrated, it was Life being frustrated through me as a character. What “I” experienced was frustration happening.” I’d feel better afterward, but still upset it didn’t strike me in the moment.
I’d just like to get to the point where I can think like this (if that’s the right way of thinking about it) in the moment (effortlessly?). Am I just theorizing too much?
What about control? If let’s say I wanted to spend time with my wife, would it be accurate to say Life is acting through me by simply saying “there’s a wanting to spend time with the wife.” Is it simply the brain (which is apart of Life) making choices, not “me?” I think this is what Gateless Gatecrashers referred to on page 69 when talking about decisions.
If anyone can guide me, I’d appreciate it very much.

-What do you expect of the conversation on this forum?
Just a solid back and forth, something similar to what is in Gateless Gatecrashers. I'll simply do what it takes.

[Canfora]

Hi Rhett, I'm Sandra and I can be your guide if that is ok with you. Thank you for your nice introduction.

Can you please confirm that you have read LU disclaimer - http://liberationunleashed.com/disclaimer-2/

You ask lots of questions in your introduction. My role isn't to answer your questions but to ask questions also and I expect that you will have a look to what is going on in your experience and answer my questions from there.

So, here is my first question: can you see a separate self, a "you" entity, when you look for it?

[ThinqueTank]

Nice to meet you Sandra, I appreciate your help. Thank you for the warm welcome.

I have read and agree to the LU disclaimer.

I see a separate self, yes. It attaches automatically to the events in the moment. Only when I stop to look at it "I" realize that it's attaching itself to life's direct experiences and labeling it as "my experience."

[Canfora]

Nice to meet you Sandra, I appreciate your help. Thank you for the warm welcome.

I realized after writing my first post to you that I forgot to say that you are very welcome to the forum. Glad to know that you feel welcomed!

I see a separate self, yes. It attaches automatically to the events in the moment. Only when I stop to look at it "I" realize that it's attaching itself to life's direct experiences and labeling it as "my experience."

So is the separate self something that you can see? Where exactly? Can you please describe this entity?
What can you see that owns this experience and attaches to what is going on right now?

(I'm assuming that if a separate self exists, it can be found here and now)

[ThinqueTank]

I realized after writing my first post to you that I forgot to say that you are very welcome to the forum. Glad to know that you feel welcomed!

It is no worry! I could tell from the tone of your post it was very pleasant. Thank you Sandra.

So is the separate self something that you can see? Where exactly? Can you please describe this entity?
What can you see that owns this experience and attaches to what is going on right now?

(I'm assuming that if a separate self exists, it can be found here and now)

I can't necessarily see it, but I just feel it's presence. It feels as though I'm feeling something when I know I shouldn't.

OK, maybe I had a revelation just now. When you say "see" the self, I obviously can't "see" it with my own eyes. I would then tell you that I "feel" it when something happens, like I just did, but when I think about it I necessarily can't "feel" it either. I wouldn't be able to describe how it feels like as if I was touching it or it was touching me. I wouldn't be able to describe it using any senses if we went down the list.

Because it's not there, the "self" me (Rhett) simply is not there. There's a body and a brain, but not a self that can be sensed and drawn if given a paper and pencil. There's no way to realistically describe it and sound sane. No matter however I try to describe the "self" I realize that it's really nothing there and I'll keep grasping at air. Kind of like trying to grab smoke. I can't describe it to you or anyone else realistically, that it's fake. Is this what is meant when they say "illusion of self?" That it (the brain) is always trying to create something of a "self" regardless of the truth (proving it doesn't exist one sense at a time) being pointed out time and time again? I know you stated you're not here to answer my questions, so I completely understand if you want to skip the last couple of sentences and continue on another track.

[Canfora]

It is no worry! I could tell from the tone of your post it was very pleasant. Thank you Sandra.

Thank you for your kindness. I can see you know how to use the quote function. Good :)

OK, maybe I had a revelation just now. When you say "see" the self, I obviously can't "see" it with my own eyes. I would then tell you that I "feel" it when something happens, like I just did, but when I think about it I necessarily can't "feel" it either. I wouldn't be able to describe how it feels like as if I was touching it or it was touching me. I wouldn't be able to describe it using any senses if we went down the list.

Interesting, no?

Because it's not there, the "self" me (Rhett) simply is not there.

Yes!

There's a body and a brain, but not a self that can be sensed and drawn if given a paper and pencil.

I like this way idea of being impossible to draw a self. It's a nice pointer. Are you saying that you are 100% sure you aren't the body and the brain or inside the body and inside the brain? Hell, where are you then? ;)

There's no way to realistically describe it and sound sane.

Hmm... yes, I agree that language never touches reality, when talking about these subjects. On the contrary, it takes us away from raw experience, straight into thoughtland.

No matter however I try to describe the "self" I realize that it's really nothing there and I'll keep grasping at air. Kind of like trying to grab smoke. I can't describe it to you or anyone else realistically, that it's fake. Is this what is meant when they say "illusion of self?" That it (the brain) is always trying to create something of a "self" regardless of the truth (proving it doesn't exist one sense at a time) being pointed out time and time again? I know you stated you're not here to answer my questions, so I completely understand if you want to skip the last couple of sentences and continue on another track.

Yes, that's a nice description of how the "illusion of self" keeps being reenforced over and over again. Language and thinking seem to keep the illusion in place, despite the fact that a self can't be proved to exist by using the senses. It is quite amazing.

What makes you say that the brain creates a self? Do you feel that the sense of self is located in the brain or created by the brain? That there are boundaries between body (brain) and the rest of life?

[ThinqueTank]

Interesting, no?

Very.

I like this way idea of being impossible to draw a self. It's a nice pointer. Are you saying that you are 100% sure you aren't the body and the brain or inside the body and inside the brain? Hell, where are you then? ;)

I think I'm completely imaginary, created by the brain(?), but not the brain nor body themselves. I definitely can't find the self anywhere, especially physically.

Hmm... yes, I agree that language never touches reality, when talking about these subjects. On the contrary, it takes us away from raw experience, straight into thought land.

Is this thought land where the self emerges?

Yes, that's a nice description of how the "illusion of self" keeps being reenforced over and over again. Language and thinking seem to keep the illusion in place, despite the fact that a self can't be proved to exist by using the senses. It is quite amazing.

Truly. This really floored me.

What makes you say that the brain creates a self? Do you feel that the sense of self is located in the brain or created by the brain? That there are boundaries between body (brain) and the rest of life?

I guess I get that belief because I'm under the impression that the brain creates the self. It tries to attach on to what life presents and takes it on as my experience. The way I'm seeing it is: I believe the brain+body are both parts of life, included with everything observed. I exist in life because the brain (body) are here. Since the brain as life made it functions just to produce a ton of thoughts, and I believe the brain creates the self: am I (referring to the self) just a bunch of thoughts? That this combination of thoughts over the years is what produces who I believe/think I am? These thoughts are what link my "self" to my body making us seem opposite from everything else that exists in life?

[Canfora]

Is this thought land where the self emerges?

Can you find a self if you're not thinking about one? You just have to look around to find the answer to this question.

These thoughts are what link my "self" to my body making us seem opposite from everything else that exists in life?

Can you give me 2 or 3 examples of how do you know body is separated from life? What makes you think that body isn't life also?

(Take your time with this ^ , I will only see your answers tomorrow)

[Canfora]

Don't think about the examples. Watch the body instead and report what you see happening when doing things like eating, walking, driving a car, taking a bath, writing a post, moving hands and head... what pops up in your experience.

Can you find the separation between a you and life?

[ThinqueTank]

OK, thank you Sandra. I've had some time to think about this.

Don't think about the examples. Watch the body instead and report what you see happening when doing things like eating, walking, driving a car, taking a bath, writing a post, moving hands and head... what pops up in your experience.

Can you find the separation between a you and life?

Watching life in this way, there seems to be no separation between body and life. The body is being apart of life. Even can say the body is life.

Are you saying that you are 100% sure you aren't the body and the brain or inside the body and inside the brain? Hell, where are you then? ;)

Can you find a self if you're not thinking about one? You just have to look around to find the answer to this question.

It seems like the only time there is a self is when there is a thought. If there's a dresser, then it's just a dresser, the self emerges when there's a thought "that's my dresser." The dresser is already a part of life, just like the body.

And thoughts are nothing, at least they can't be found with senses. That'd make them have no direct experience which makes them not a part of life?

[Canfora]

Watching life in this way, there seems to be no separation between body and life. The body is being apart of life. Even can say the body is life.

Is this an intellectual conclusion or did you look? Where are the examples I asked for? :)

And thoughts are nothing, at least they can't be found with senses. That'd make them have no direct experience which makes them not a part of life?

I understand what your saying, thoughts can't be found with the senses but I would say they sure are experienced - as images and sounds it seems.

Most people believe that they are the thinker of thoughts and that thoughts are their thoughts.

I would like you to look at thoughts, Rhett (like if they were objects appearing).
If you look at the experience of thinking, what can you see?

Can you find what causes a thought - the thinker?
Can a thought think?
Are thoughts your thoughts - do you have control over them?

[ThinqueTank]

Watching life in this way, there seems to be no separation between body and life. The body is being apart of life. Even can say the body is life.

Is this an intellectual conclusion or did you look? Where are the examples I asked for? :)

I just wanted to answer this first part of your post above. I'm working on the second half of this post still.

I admit I theorized at first, but came to see it somewhat when I talked about the dresser and also when I was preparing lunch. I found that no matter what my body did, it was affected by something in life. In particular, If I got cold, that's life touching me. Realized from there that no matter what I did/what I do, I couldn't separate myself from life or experience.

[quote-"Canphora"]

And thoughts are nothing, at least they can't be found with senses. That'd make them have no direct experience which makes them not a part of life?

I understand what your saying, thoughts can't be found with the senses but I would say they sure are experienced - as images and sounds it seems.

Most people believe that they are the thinker of thoughts and that thoughts are their thoughts.

I would like you to look at thoughts, Rhett (like if they were objects appearing).
If you look at the experience of thinking, what can you see?

Can you find what causes a thought - the thinker?
Can a thought think?
Are thoughts your thoughts - do you have control over them?[/quote]
I'm working on doing what you're asking for here right now.

These are my finding so far: I can't find who's doing the thinking. Thoughts just keep going, one into the next, can be the most random thing at the moment. Because of that it suggests I have no control of the direction of them, nor their content. If anything I can only influence what is brought up in the moment by placing myself in a situation. Like if I need to go to the store: I'll have to think of the directions to there while I'm driving. Then out of nowhere I'll think of a singer. Can't control it unless I'm focused, and even then it's not like I can select what to think.

Another example of this is: Talking to you right now. Does this qualify as sharing thoughts? I'm having thoughts right now, and it feels like I can control them because their content is specifically about what we're talking about. I can (I guess) control what I'm bringing up, but am I really controlling it? Does that qualify as control because it's not like I'm bringing thoughts up, they're only popping into my head in whatever form they are in relation to a certain focus.

[Canfora]

Thank you for looking at your experience, that's the way to go.

I'm having thoughts right now, and it feels like I can control them because their content is specifically about what we're talking about. I can (I guess) control what I'm bringing up, but am I really controlling it?

You can think you have control over thoughts, sure, but - if you can't experience what controls thinking - isn't thinking that you have control just another self referential thought?

What happens if I ask you to think about a number from 1 to 10?
Can you know what number will pop up before the number pops up?
If you can't know what number will be thought (or not thought) before it happens, how can there be any control over thinking?

Anyway, I'm not trying to convince you of anything, you have to look for yourself to be sure. If you think you have control over thoughts then go for it and exert that control. You can try, for example, to think only "happy" thoughts for the rest of the day. If you do have control over thoughts that must be easy to do.

[ThinqueTank]

Thank you for looking at your experience, that's the way to go.


You can think you have control over thoughts, sure, but - if you can't experience what controls thinking - isn't thinking that you have control just another self referential thought?

Having trying to do this, I think I see what you're saying. I don't see this person that controls thinking anywhere to be found. Further, I can't control what I think, me thinking I can and not being able to is further proof there's nobody there to do it. I think the next question helps me explain it more.

What happens if I ask you to think about a number from 1 to 10?
Can you know what number will pop up before the number pops up?

A number simply pops up, and I have no control over it whatsoever. As an example: I can try to rationalize a number (such as trying to pick a number in the middle, in this case "5"), but the thought of taking this route would also just pop in my head. I didn't make a plan to rationalize the reason to pick the number in response to this question.

Even further, there is no way to have planned doing that. In the grand scheme of things, your question seemingly has appeared out of nowhere. I could not have got a thought ready in order to have to got together a plan to think up of the number ahead of time, I'm simply responding in a non-controllable fashion.

Which means good/bad ideas are also out of my control I guess. I think I simply react to life, having no control over what I have done/answered, because how I answer/respond is how I answer/respond. This all makes sense, because if I did have control over my thinking and actions, I'd probably be a great musician by now. I wouldn't miss hitting any keys on the piano, ever.

[/quote="Canfora"]If you can't know what number will be thought (or not thought) before it happens, how can there be any control over thinking?[/quote]

Exactly, I can't know, and I have zero control over it.

Anyway, I'm not trying to convince you of anything, you have to look for yourself to be sure. If you think you have control over thoughts then go for it and exert that control. You can try, for example, to think only "happy" thoughts for the rest of the day. If you do have control over thoughts that must be easy to do.

Yes I'm all too familiar with this. The mind wanders and I have zero control over it, otherwise I'd have control over being happy all day. Something I've tried repeatedly in the past to no avail. I believe it's the same reason why sometimes before I play a song on the piano and tell myself not to mess this play through up, I'll mess up. I have no control over it. I have no control over what happens either.

[ThinqueTank]

I don't know how to quite edit my last post, but here's what i've discovered:

However I got this thought that lead me to doing whatever I did, I had no say in it.