The Gate

So when we say we feel the sensations in the body, this is a useful waybto describe it but is that really true? What's this ME that is experiencing sensations? What's this ME inside another body that can't feel your sensations?

The body feels it, right? Nerves gather information and it's interpreted in a brain. Light hits the eye and electrical signals are received in the brain. Where is this ME that is aware of this but not someone else sensations?

Speach is a useful function. It's helpful to say to the doctor you are feeling pain in the stomach so they know which body to help. But we grow up learning to take this as literally true. The words are like an analog representation of reality. All they can do is cover reality which is useful but it's like trying to walk around in unfamiar territory with a map your child drew instead of a photographic map.

So investigate. Is there something separate from the bodily feeling that is experiencing the feelings? If a hammer is dropped on a foot on your body and THIS body does not feel the pain, does that mean there is a separate self in that body than in this one?

Things seem to be personal? Well how else could it be? For it to not seem personal you would need to feel the experiences of "others". But seeing there is no separate being "in" this body, how is it then logical to assume there are other separate "me" beings "inside" other bodies? What is "personal"? What is identification? What is self other than a way of thinking? The conditioned tendency to draw dividing lines of "me" vs "not me"?

When you see a bird, what is really happening? I mean in direct experience alone. Leaving behind all learned concepts. Sticking with what cannot be denied, what is always known to be true. Direct Experience!!! I'm not suggesting there is a world outside of your body that you are accurately experiencing directly. But try this out: just look. What is there before any mental labeling? What can you know for sure? There is something called color. ...contrast. Maybe some movement which is really just a changing of colors. You can't even see distance. There is just color and form. It takes some mental processing even to tell if it is small and close, or large and far. It takes some computing to tell any objects from others. Receiving only the data before interpretation there is no division. No separate objects. No things until there are thoughts. Only a field of contrast we call color. The eye just receives it like a window. After that there is interpretation. And since there's a possibility that it could be interpreted incorrectly (even the word interpreted suggests it is like a best guess. Like we can't get it right so we try to get close lol) the smartest way is to start from zero. With what IS undeniably true. You know for sure right now what is perceived. Not the interpretation (though you know there is interpretation) but the raw data. Again I'm not suggesting you are accurately perceiving your environment but you are undeniably seeing exactly what you see. Stick with this when doing any of this inquiry.
It's much more reliable that trying to think your way through a jungle of thoughts wondering if you have the right thought.

So there is a shape and colors matching what gets labelled as "bird". Sensory data received and interpreted in mind. Where is this separate being that is aware of these sensations and thoughts? Or is it just sensations and thoughts happening? Including sometimes, the thoughts that there is a separate you that is seeing the bird, but is not the bird? And the assumption that there is a bird self in that body interpreting and being aware of it's perceptions?

I know I wrote a lot and I have been making the same point in different ways but I am just speaking as the thoughts come. So sorry if it seems like I've rambled. Please take your time and try to distill the one or two points I was trying to make and let me know where you are at with all of this. :)

I just saw your post and I’m gonna sit with your questions tonight and tomorrow.

But I’ve been contemplating my last post and it seems to me that what I basically wrote is that even though I can’t find an I controlling things/life (and therefore now believe there isn’t one) there’s the belief/feeling/thought that there is an I or center to whom everything happens, although this center is completely powerless and in no way control life but just experience things.

I looked some at this but feel a bit lost here. Thinking about it now your last question seem to be pointing at this subject.
Hmmm gonna look at this and will report back tomorrow.

Oooohhhhhhhh there were three more posts =)

I'll have to read them now then. Be back tomorrow!

Please take your time and try to distill the one or two points I was trying to make and let me know where you are at with all of this. :)

Yeah I'm gonna take you literally on this :-) I really appreciate the long answer but think that I'm going to need some time looking at this. Read it a few times to make sure what you are pointing at is getting in :)

Just writing to check in. You know, writing this now I have the feeling that I haven’t spent enough time today looking at the questions/pointers you’ve given me. Like I’m avoiding it all. But then right now, in this moment, there’s the feeling that there’s no need to set aside a specific amount of time only looking at this. Then it’s just the same thing and problem as with meditation – you’re relaxed while doing it, but once finished…

Instead there’s a feeling (although small and in the background) of relaxation and a sense of obviousness about it all. When not being totally absorbed in thoughts and fighting against them things just are. There’s nothing to do and nothing to look for.

I’ve read your posts a few times and they help. Especially you so thoroughly :-) pointing out and asking me to look at and see what is true. And not my interpretation about what’s true and what is happening. When the mind quietens down a bit it’s easier to just look and be aware of what is happening.

Well well. I’ll continue looking into this. I’m not sure if I’ll be able to post anything tomorrow. If not I’ll be back on Saturday.

Thank you!

No problem. Sorry for missing a day again. Internet troubles at home. It's all too common unfortunately. I'll try to respond more fully from work in a few hours.

Ok I feel I should wait for a clear response from you before we move on. I know I wrote a lot and made the same point several times in different ways. Just have a relaxed look at it. Don't strain. See what comes up when you read what I wrote. Don't worry about "getting it right". Talk to you later Jakob. :)

When you see a bird, what is really happening? I mean in direct experience alone. Leaving behind all learned concepts. Sticking with what cannot be denied, what is always known to be true. Direct Experience!!! I'm not suggesting there is a world outside of your body that you are accurately experiencing directly. But try this out: just look. What is there before any mental labeling? What can you know for sure? There is something called color. ...contrast. Maybe some movement which is really just a changing of colors. You can't even see distance. There is just color and form. It takes some mental processing even to tell if it is small and close, or large and far. It takes some computing to tell any objects from others. Receiving only the data before interpretation there is no division. No separate objects. No things until there are thoughts. Only a field of contrast we call color. The eye just receives it like a window. After that there is interpretation. And since there's a possibility that it could be interpreted incorrectly (even the word interpreted suggests it is like a best guess. Like we can't get it right so we try to get close lol) the smartest way is to start from zero. With what IS undeniably true. You know for sure right now what is perceived. Not the interpretation (though you know there is interpretation) but the raw data. Again I'm not suggesting you are accurately perceiving your environment but you are undeniably seeing exactly what you see. Stick with this when doing any of this inquiry.
It's much more reliable that trying to think your way through a jungle of thoughts wondering if you have the right thought.

This pointing toward direct experience is helpful. But it takes some serious conscious effort not to get lost in the interpretation of what is seen. The interpretation happens almost instantly so it’s really difficult not to get lost in it. It’s only when being really really really really relaxed and present that it’s possible for me to notice the gap that is there between what is experienced by the senses and the interpretation of it.

During this conversation there’s been occasions when awareness (here meaning staying with the senses and not getting lost in the interpretation of what’s registered by the senses) has been more at the forefront. At those times things feel clearer and a lot more effortless. The feeling of a separate me registering everything is less strong. This seems to be a key point here. But how does this work in everyday life?? I would like to say: how can I keep remembering myself to always come back to the senses and not always being lost in thinking? But then… this I and myself… But to be honest, all this is really frustrating. I’m tired of being caught up in my made up thought-world, but I keep slipping back in.

There is a separate self it not. Just look and say what is actually seen

What is this "me" that you think could make a serious conscious effort?

Something is noticed or it isn't. Only thinking is saying that it is "me" doing it. And what is "me" but another thought, incapable of action?

If there really is no self then how could I give you a technique to always realize something?
You want to know how to grab control of it and keep things the way you want? (I know it seems like I'm making it sound petty and selfish, but is wanting enlightenment basically any different than wanting a candy or wealth and fame?).
What is this "me" that wants things it's way?

Anyway my best answer is that you can't do it. Nobody ever could. Not even the most enlightened masters. There was never anybody to do anything.

There are practices to help increase this staying present. They can be found everywhere. But the purpose of this talk is solely to have you see clearly whether or not there really is a "myself" in life. What do you find when looking for "I", "Me"? And is that really a separate self?

It’s a bit late here now and I really don’t know what to say. I’ll write more thoroughly tomorrow. Just spontaneously what I’m feeling and thinking in the moment is that everything appears as a catch 22. The main question that is asked here is whether there is a ‘me’ or not. When looking for ‘me’ nothing is found but most of the time there’s no conscious looking for a ‘me’ and therefore the bodymind thing writing this now acts as if there is a ‘me’ in control.

If you ever get tired of guiding this slow-to-learn, stubborn person writing this just let me know. Even if I’m despairing at times I want to see this through.
And yes, I know (at least intellectually): there’s no-one here to learn or get anything ;)

But yes, you’re right. Wanting enlightenment isn’t basically any different than wanting a candy. Although I know that I’ve felt ( and probably feel) more righteous about wanting this pure, true thing then those petty people that’s out there chasing fame, money and a career…

And yes, it’s a scary thought that ‘gaining’ enlightenment won’t save me and my fears and everything else shitty from the world out there… That world that I in the end really love.

So if you see when looking that there is no self we are done! That is the gate. If you're looking to capture that and keep it always, I'm not saying it can't happen (but it won't be because of anything you do. If there is no you, you can't do anything! It happens or not!)

So let's just try out a few questions. If there is anything left we need to look further into, I'll be able to tell from your answers. So don't try to get it right. Just answer directly what you find now. Not what you think about it or what it must mean.

1) are you getting rid of a separate self, or was there never a separate self? Explain: