Requesting a guide to help me gatecrash

[Toonami]

Hi Pete,

Thanks and I had a great one too. This is a first time when I feel a bit of resistance/mental turbulence to answer few of the questions.

First, given that you've already seen that thoughts just kind of pop up seemingly out of nowhere, rather than being created or controlled by 'you', where would the plan to pace your walking come from and how would it be formed? Looking in direct experience can you see a plan or any entity creating it?

I wanted to clarify this earlier, but the thoughts that pop up from nowhere and which I don’t have any control over are ‘random/stray’ thoughts. There is another category called ‘deliberate’ thoughts which plans, analyses, prepares,guides, responds(after analysing information) and chooses. By their very nature, I’m not able to see that these deliberate thoughts are arising out of nowhere. These thoughts are a consequence of ‘thinking’ as an action done by a thinker as a response to a direct experience.

Secondly, during a planned walk, are you aware in direct experience of any independent self entity deliberately adjusting your pace? If so, please describe that process, as well as the entity controlling what happens.

The process is such that there is a plan to complete 6 km in 1 hour. There is an intention (which again is a thought) to successfully accomplish this. Which drives to check my watch after 30 minutes to see how much distance I have covered. I see that I have done only 2 km, hence I increase my pace to cover 4 km in the remaining 30 minutes.

But can you find any evidence in direct experience that, although whatever you do is 'automatic' when you feel ok, when you feel ill, low, or are in any other stressful or negative state, a self entity that is a doer and a controller somehow appears and takes over?
Can you say a bit more about what you mean by conditional Jason.
If what you do is sometimes forced, can you explain to me what it is that you see when you look into your direct experience that is doing this forcing, and go into brief detail to describe your experience of how the forcing mechanism works.

I will try to provide a response to both these questions as they are related. I also find it difficult to answer this question, but let me try to explain in the best way what I see or conditioned to see.

There seems to be an overall mindset, or a ‘strong thought’ which prevails and dictates how life is supposed to be and what needs to be done. All morals, thumb rules, beliefs seem to run in this strong thought. If there is a violation or deviation, something(self?) tries to correct it by forcing.
For example, exercising daily will lead to healthy living is a thumb rule encoded in the strong thought. If I do not exercise for a few days (a violation of that rule), the correction mechanism kicks in and forces me to get out for a run or a gym session.

At this point, all I can deduce is that, there has to be an entity (thinker/observer) which notices the deviation/violation and kickstarts the correction mechanism and forces me to be on track again.

I also watched the BBC experiment, and to me it seems that those 6 seconds can be explained just as the latency between the mind (subconscious) taking a decision and transmitting to your conscious self and physical body. And the nature of experiment seems to be based on reflexes. If I widen the scope to maybe include solving a mathematical puzzle, there is definitely a role the conscious mind searches for the right formulae, applies them and solves it. May be I missed the point of the whole video. Let me watch it once again and try to understand it better.

To be frank, I am a bit overwhelmed at this point to take the other two questions (around choices). I will take some more time and respond to them tomorrow. Meanwhile, even before we proceed with this, I would feel good if I can resolve the first two items with your guidance.

Regards
J

[moondog]

Hi Jason,

Thanks for your comments. I'd like to wait for your other replies before responding in full.

One thing though, remember we are simply looking for a separate self-entity in direct experience, rather than an impersonal process that ends in doing, choosing etc., which is what the BBC video demonstrates. In regard to your comments in your last post, can you describe to me in each case, where this self-entity is to be found in direct experience. What does the entity that controls and decided for you look like? (Is there a 'you' deciding things for a second, separate 'you') How does it function in direct experience?

Pete x

[Toonami]

Hi pete,
I continue my responses to the other questions here.

Raise your right arm (or don’t). In that process of raising the right arm (or not), a decision is made, or at least something happens (or doesn’t). But can you pinpoint the actual moment of choice and find the actual entity that appears to be making that choice? In direct experience, can that moment of choice, that apparent chooser, actually be found? Or does the idea 'I just chose to (not) raise my right arm' come after the event itself?

This was interesting. I mean, even if there is a thought that says ‘raise your arm now’, I can still choose not to raise it. But the choice maker is not perceived through direct experience. Even though it cannot be seen through direct experience, it is real because the arm is raised or not because of it.

In direct experience 'things' just happen. Do you agree? If not, please describe for me what you see that makes choices or decisions.

Yes I agree. But we cannot capture all life just within direct experience. Because as explained in the previous response, there seems to be an invisible decision maker (I don’t know exactly what to call this. May be a combination of subconscious and conscious mind?) that makes the choices.

Just to let you know that I think it's going really well so far Jason. How do you think you're doing?

Hey, I’m really enjoying the process and the way it is unfolding. Earlier, I used to feel sorry for and even angry at myself for encouraging negative thoughts. But having seen that these negative thoughts or for that matter any thought rises beyond our control, makes me feel a little better. Even at this early phase, I can see that my perception has already changed (only by a little bit.)

Regards
J

[moondog]

Hi Jason,

First I'd just like to repeat a fundamental bit from my third post:

What you can see, hear, touch, taste and smell, i.e. sense arisings, are your direct experience, or what I also termed the flow of experience and, along with thoughts, are all that ever happens 'to you'. Looking into 'your' direct experience is where I will be frequently pointing you to look, and where this investigation will take place. That's as opposed to thought content. Direct experience is the very core of what we're doing here with this. Essentially, and utterly fundamentally, all there is, and can ever be, is here right now in this moment. So looking to see whether a separate and separating self is to be found can only take place within direct experience of this. Now. There's nothing else. It follows therefore that all of our work to realise and actually know that there is no self is done by investigating In direct experience. To this end,and reiterating what I've just said, we can divide direct experience into thought, sensations (seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, feeling [tactile and kinaesthetic].

Outside of our direct experience there's just the contents of our thoughts but they are mere concepts, echoes and shadows of what's already been and gone, dodgy data packages that might help us organise or plan, but not real and not to be relied upon or confused with what is actually happening right now. Within this, I-thoughts predominate, perpetuating the illusion by continually 'saying' that there is a special you that steps in to do the really important stuff when it's needed.

I wanted to clarify this earlier, but the thoughts that pop up from nowhere and which I don’t have any control over are ‘random/stray’ thoughts. There is another category called ‘deliberate’ thoughts which plans, analyses, prepares,guides, responds(after analysing information) and chooses. By their very nature, I’m not able to see that these deliberate thoughts are arising out of nowhere. These thoughts are a consequence of ‘thinking’ as an action done by a thinker as a response to a direct experience.

Please describe your direct experience of this category of 'deliberate' thought. Please describe the thinker and how it thinks. What does it look like? How does it decide what to think and where does it manufacture or create the thoughts from?

The process is such that there is a plan to complete 6 km in 1 hour. There is an intention (which again is a thought) to successfully accomplish this. Which drives to check my watch after 30 minutes to see how much distance I have covered. I see that I have done only 2 km, hence I increase my pace to cover 4 km in the remaining 30 minutes.

Again, solely from direct experience, please describe to me what happens when you check your watch and increase your pace. Is there a district entity there that tells 'you' what to do? If so, how does it make decisions? How does it decide to decide, and decide to decide to decide, ad absurdum? Or, as was conclusively shown in the BBC video, did the decision form in the brain, six seconds beforehand, and before a thought arose saying,'I decided that'?

At this point, all I can deduce is that, there has to be an entity (thinker/observer) which notices the deviation/violation and kickstarts the correction mechanism and forces me to be on track again

But isn't your deduction just another thought uncorroborated in any way by your actual experience! just like any I-thought? What is it that notices? Can you find it?

If I widen the scope to maybe include solving a mathematical puzzle, there is definitely a role the conscious mind searches for the right formulae, applies them and solves it.

Yes, but where in your direct experience is the self, the 'I' in all of this? Can you find it? Is it there?

This was interesting. I mean, even if there is a thought that says ‘raise your arm now’, I can still choose not to raise it. But the choice maker is not perceived through direct experience. Even though it cannot be seen through direct experience, it is real because the arm is raised or not because of it.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you're saying here. Did you find a separate self doing anything, or even present at all? If not perceived in direct experience, where can the choice maker be, except in thought? But, that's not real is it?

In direct experience 'things' just happen. Do you agree? If not, please describe for me what you see that makes choices or decisions.

Yes I agree. But we cannot capture all life just within direct experience. Because as explained in the previous response, there seems to be an invisible decision maker (I don’t know exactly what to call this. May be a combination of subconscious and conscious mind?) that makes the choices.

Again, I don't really understand what you're saying here. The whole point of this investigation is to see whether a self-entity can be found in direct experience and, if not, if it's only a thought, it can be seen just to be an illusion, a passing thought. How then can you posit an invisible decision maker? Sorry, but it makes no sense to say that, when you can't find something anywhere, that it's really there, but invisible. As direct experience (and the BBC video) shows, sense arisings, thoughts, choices, decisions etc. just arise,each the unique product of an infinite number of previous conditions stretching back into the infinite past

Hey, I’m really enjoying the process and the way it is unfolding. Earlier, I used to feel sorry for and even angry at myself for encouraging negative thoughts. But having seen that these negative thoughts or for that matter any thought rises beyond our control, makes me feel a little better. Even at this early phase, I can see that my perception has already changed (only by a little bit.)

I'm glad. This is a fun dialogue, but remember, you can't think your way to seeing the truth of no self, but you can think your way into refusing to see it. Trust your actual, immediate and direct experience.

Pete x

[Toonami]

Hi pete,

Please find my responses below.

Please describe your direct experience of this category of 'deliberate' thought. Please describe the thinker and how it thinks. What does it look like? How does it decide what to think and where does it manufacture or create the thoughts from?

Ok. I can see that deliberate thought is also a thought only (arising out of nowhere), but it is a thought which is a response to immediate direct experience. Ex. Driving, when presented with a puzzle to solve and the process of solving it, answering to questions etc.

Again, solely from direct experience, please describe to me what happens when you check your watch and increase your pace. Is there a district entity there that tells 'you' what to do? If so, how does it make decisions? How does it decide to decide, and decide to decide to decide, ad absurdum? Or, as was conclusively shown in the BBC video, did the decision form in the brain, six seconds beforehand, and before a thought arose saying,'I decided that'?

The decision is formed in the brain only before a conscious thought arising. Actually there is no distinct entity. It is a thought which forms posteriori to the brain's decision. Which means, is the brain just working as a calculator which processes inputs which can include feelings, data, environmental elements, past, beliefs etc. and takes a decision impersonally, which is then revealed to the consciousness as a thought (6 seconds later).

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you're saying here. Did you find a separate self doing anything, or even present at all? If not perceived in direct experience, where can the choice maker be, except in thought? But, that's not real is it?

What I meant to say was that, even if I try to force a thought in my mind 'raise my arm', still I can 'choose' not to raise my arm and my arm is not raised. But all of a sudden it seems to raise without any thoughts or enforcements. But I can now see that, this is attributed to the decision made by the brain (6 seconds before) independent of the thoughts I'm thinking.

How then can you posit an invisible decision maker? Sorry, but it makes no sense to say that, when you can't find something anywhere, that it's really there, but invisible.

As per the BBC video, decisions are made before 6 seconds it becomes evident to self consciousness. The MRI and the researchers can know which decision you are going to take a whole 6 seconds before. Now who takes this decision for you before you know in your consciousness? That's what I called as the invisible decision maker.

Regards
J

[moondog]

Hi Jason,

Ok. I can see that deliberate thought is also a thought only (arising out of nowhere), but it is a thought which is a response to immediate direct experience. Ex. Driving, when presented with a puzzle to solve and the process of solving it, answering to questions etc.

Ok, that's great and I agree entirely. Just to be sure, do you agree that, without a seer, thinker, chooser etc., i.e. with just seeing, thinking, deciding etc. happening, there's no entity to make whatever happens actually deliberate?

The decision is formed in the brain only before a conscious thought arising. Actually there is no distinct entity. It is a thought which forms posteriori to the brain's decision. Which means, is the brain just working as a calculator which processes inputs which can include feelings, data, environmental elements, past, beliefs etc. and takes a decision impersonally, which is then revealed to the consciousness as a thought (6 seconds later).

That sounds like a reasonable explanation, and the main thing is that you cannot see any self entity involved or present within any of this, which is excellent.

What I meant to say was that, even if I try to force a thought in my mind 'raise my arm', still I can 'choose' not to raise my arm and my arm is not raised. But all of a sudden it seems to raise without any thoughts or enforcements. But I can now see that, this is attributed to the decision made by the brain (6 seconds before) independent of the thoughts I'm thinking.

Spot on, you get that. I'm really pleased.

As per the BBC video, decisions are made before 6 seconds it becomes evident to self consciousness. The MRI and the researchers can know which decision you are going to take a whole 6 seconds before. Now who takes this decision for you before you know in your consciousness? That's what I called as the invisible decision maker.

Thanks for clarifying that Jason.
Can you see that really this is just an impersonal process with no 'who', 'invisible decision maker' or 'you' evident in direct experience?

This all looks a lot clearer to me now, in as much as you certainly now appear to be consistently saying that in all of the areas of direct experience that you've looked at so far, you haven't been able to find any evidence of a 'you', any separate self-entity with any function.

Is that correct? If not, please let me know where this self is to be found and what it does.

There's one important area we haven't looked at yet: the body. There can be a tendency for some people to fixate on the body as there centre or container of self, so let's look at that:

As always, in direct experience:

Does the body experience sensations and thoughts?

Is the "body" just another thought label for sensations (namely tactile & kinaesthetic)?

Pete x

[Toonami]

Hi Pete,

Ok, that's great and I agree entirely. Just to be sure, do you agree that, without a seer, thinker, chooser etc., i.e. with just seeing, thinking, deciding etc. happening, there's no entity to make whatever happens actually deliberate?
Can you see that really this is just an impersonal process with no 'who', 'invisible decision maker' or 'you' evident in direct experience?

Yes I agree that there is no entity to make whatever happens. Actually there is one remaining aspect which I need clarity on. Sometimes when we are presented with choices (especially when they are important), even though the decision is made by the brain (following the BBC video and general understanding after last discussion), we seem to have some troublesome or tormenting time to choose one or the other. This has happened to me in the past. How can we explain this, with the understanding that the brain takes the decision? Why is that we have sleepless nights mulling over what to choose between options?

as much as you certainly now appear to be consistently saying that in all of the areas of direct experience that you've looked at so far, you haven't been able to find any evidence of a 'you', any separate self-entity with any function.
Is that correct? If not, please let me know where this self is to be found and what it does.

That is correct, there is no self or a separate self entity.

As always, in direct experience:
Does the body experience sensations and thoughts?

Yes the sensations and thoughts experienced by the body are real, but body receives the direct experiences as a process. It has no control over it, nor it acts as an entity that manages the process of sensations or thoughts.

Is the "body" just another thought label for sensations (namely tactile & kinaesthetic)?

I'm not sure about that as it is also is a label for all the physical elements such as blood, bones, skin and muscles.
Hence the definition of body can just not be restricted to a label for sensations.

Regards
J

[moondog]

Hi Jason,

Yes I agree that there is no entity to make whatever happens

Good.

Sometimes when we are presented with choices (especially when they are important), even though the decision is made by the brain (following the BBC video and general understanding after last discussion), we seem to have some troublesome or tormenting time to choose one or the other. This has happened to me in the past. How can we explain this, with the understanding that the brain takes the decision? Why is that we have sleepless nights mulling over what to choose between options?

As you now see, thoughts just arise and it seems that when we have what we consider to be an important decision to make, and there is emotion involved, thoughts attach to this emotional energy, and these worry-thoughts tend to proliferate. Then, further attention is paid to these worry thoughts, and they further proliferate, and round and round it all goes, and quiet and rest is elusive, as is sleep. Also, if we think that we are a self-entity, we think that we can think our way to a decision. Eventually, the mind/a thought may arise saying that we will do x or y and we can tell ourselves that it's sorted, a decision has been made. However, only when we actually come to carry out x or y will we know what the 'decision' is; it may not even be what we've told ourselves we've decided. I would add that, now 'you' know that there is no 'you' doing all this worrying and deciding, it may well be that this sort of troublesome or tormenting process will lose its energy and subside much more quickly, causing far less suffering.
The main thing here however, and what we're concerned with, is that you can clearly see that there's no 'you' involved or present in all of this.

That is correct, there is no self or a separate self entity.

Excellent.

Yes the sensations and thoughts experienced by the body are real, but body receives the direct experiences as a process. It has no control over it, nor it acts as an entity that manages the process of sensations or thoughts.

So, you cannot find in direct experience any entity controlling or managing anything.

I'm not sure about that as it is also is a label for all the physical elements such as blood, bones, skin and muscles.
Hence the definition of body can just not be restricted to a label for sensations.

Remember however, that the question was:

As always, in direct experience:
Does the body experience sensations and thoughts?
Is the "body" just another thought label for sensations (namely tactile & kinaesthetic)?

So, this isn't about what you already know and remember about the body, i.e. the content of thoughts arising, but your direct experience only. In your direct experience, is there 'body' or just sense sensations that you conventionally label 'my body'? It's a bit like there's no 'you' seeing or hearing something, but just seeing and hearing. Can there be in direct experience a body experiencing, or is there just simply experiencing?

You're doing really well Jason.

Pete x

[Toonami]

Hi Pete,

I was not feeling sleepy today, hence I'm making one more entry for the day.

As you now see, thoughts just arise and it seems that when we have what we consider to be an important decision to make, and there is emotion involved, thoughts attach to this emotional energy, and these worry-thoughts tend to proliferate. Then, further attention is paid to these worry thoughts, and they further proliferate, and round and round it all goes, and quiet and rest is elusive, as is sleep. Also, if we think that we are a self-entity, we think that we can think our way to a decision. Eventually, the mind/a thought may arise saying that we will do x or y and we can tell ourselves that it's sorted, a decision has been made. However, only when we actually come to carry out x or y will we know what the 'decision' is; it may not even be what we've told ourselves we've decided. I would add that, now 'you' know that there is no 'you' doing all this worrying and deciding, it may well be that this sort of troublesome or tormenting process will lose its energy and subside much more quickly, causing far less suffering.
The main thing here however, and what we're concerned with, is that you can clearly see that there's no 'you' involved or present in all of this.

Excellent explanation. If this was Reddit, I would have gifted you gold for this. Thanks a lot! While this brings a bit of relief, it is quite scary as well. For example, consider the case of suicide. Going by our analysis, suicide victims never know whether they are in control of killing themselves or not at any point of time, until they actually pull that trigger or jump off that bridge.
Given that the brain is just a calculating machine, how can we assume that it will always work towards preserving life? I'm sorry for belabouring this point here, but I feel the best I/we can do is try to provide salubrious direct experiences to ourselves and others so that the brain has the right factors/inputs to make a better decision and not get into suicide/killing others etc. But if that is the case, don't I become a doer trying to provide salubrious direct experiences? Isn't this a contradiction? You may answer back saying that trying to provide salubrious direct experiences is just a passing thought, but does that mean we can never improve ourselves? Is everything pre destined? I'm not sure if I'm on the right track of seeing here or if I missed some point and regressed, but I would be glad if you can provide your response to this.

So, you cannot find in direct experience any entity controlling or managing anything.

Yes, that is correct.

So, this isn't about what you already know and remember about the body, i.e. the content of thoughts arising, but your direct experience only. In your direct experience, is there 'body' or just sense sensations that you conventionally label 'my body'? It's a bit like there's no 'you' seeing or hearing something, but just seeing and hearing. Can there be in direct experience a body experiencing, or is there just simply experiencing?

Can you maybe paraphrase this - "or just sense sensations that you conventionally label 'my body'?" I'm not sure if I got the question right.
If I look at the mirror, or just look down my own body, I can clearly see (a direct experience) that there are hands, fingers and legs etc. You can touch them and ensure that there is a clear definition of our own body and there are boundaries to where your arms end and your where your head is, what shape it is and so on.
If such is the case, how can we say that there is no body similar to there is no 'I'?

Thanks for all your guidance till now, it has been really helpful.

Regards
J

[moondog]

HI Jason,

So, you cannot find in direct experience any entity controlling or managing anything.

Yes, that is correct

Good.I just needed to be certain about that, and now I am.

Excellent explanation. If this was Reddit, I would have gifted you gold for this. Thanks a lot! While this brings a bit of relief, it is quite scary as well.

Thanks. I went into some detail because it included an explanation of matters closely related to direct experience.

Given that the brain is just a calculating machine, how can we assume that it will always work towards preserving life? I'm sorry for belabouring this point here, but I feel the best I/we can do is try to provide salubrious direct experiences to ourselves and others so that the brain has the right factors/inputs to make a better decision and not get into suicide/killing others etc. But if that is the case, don't I become a doer trying to provide salubrious direct experiences? Isn't this a contradiction? You may answer back saying that trying to provide salubrious direct experiences is just a passing thought, but does that mean we can never improve ourselves? Is everything pre destined? I'm not sure if I'm on the right track of seeing here or if I missed some point and regressed, but I would be glad if you can provide your response to this.

This however isn't. Again, you are trying to figure some of this out through thought and speculation. It won't work. All it will do, if I take the bait to follow this red herring with you, is produce a prolonged discussion and, in all probability, discover nothing of use. Only looking into direct experience can do the job of you actually seeing no self, and you say you've already done that, wherever you've looked so far.

Suffice it to say that I don't necessarily accept that the brain 'is just a calculating machine'. I wouldn't want to further label what we conventionally call the brain; I'm not that certain what it does, and it's not really relevant for your investigation, looking only in direct experience. Also, we are all just life living itself in this moment, perfect as it is with not a self in evidence. That includes the apparently innate ability of myriad sentient beings, including humans, to look after 'themselves' and their wellbeing without any effort to be 'salubrious'. Who is there to make any effort anyway?

I feel the best I/we can do is try to provide salubrious direct experiences to ourselves and others so that the brain has the right factors/inputs to make a better decision and not get into suicide/killing others etc.

Given that you've specifically confirmed that you can't find any managing or controlling entity, can you explain why you can then entertain the possibility of there being such an entity? Isn't that a bit like discovering for a fact that there's no Santa and then, shortly afterwards, declaring "Hey, you know what. I think I actually saw Santa in the local mall. No, I really do think it could have been him!'

Can you maybe paraphrase this - "or just sense sensations that you conventionally label 'my body'?" I'm not sure if I got the question right.
If I look at the mirror, or just look down my own body, I can clearly see (a direct experience) that there are hands, fingers and legs etc. You can touch them and ensure that there is a clear definition of our own body and there are boundaries to where your arms end and your where your head is, what shape it is and so on.
If such is the case, how can we say that there is no body similar to there is no 'I'?

The intention of this enquiry into the body is quite straightforward. It's to see whether you can find in direct experience either a separate self as the body, or a separate self contained somewhere within the body. If the body is seen to be merely a label attached to certain sense sensations, it can be seen that, rather than there being in direct experience an entity called the body, there are just sense arisings, with no possibility of there being any self there. These sense arisings include seeing parts of the body as well. The mind then steps in to label these parts, just as it does the whole, 'the body'.

So, can you find a self as or contained within 'your body' in direct experience? If so, where is it? How does it appear, and what does it do? How does it function?

Anyway, it still seems to be going well and so I'd like to ask you some sweep-up questions, to see whether there are any areas that need further investigation, so that we can both be sure that you can see for sure that there's just no you anywhere at all.

In direct experience:

Have you been able to find, a ‘self’ that is the ‘experiencer’?

Or a self that is the doer, or can control what happens?

Or a self that ‘makes’ decisions?

Or a self who ‘does the thinking’?

Is the "body" just another thought label for sensations (namely tactile & kinesthetic)?

Are the five body senses made to arise or experienced by this ‘self’?

Is there a self ‘in here’ which is separate from the world and others ‘out there’

Is there doubt or unclarity that in all these cases the ‘self’ is nothing other than a mental fabrication?

Are there any doubts about seeing through the illusion of separate self?

It's a bit of a long list of questions but the answers can be brief unless, as I said, there is something you want to examine some more.

I hope you have a really Happy New Year!

Pete x

[Toonami]

Hi Pete,

Wish you a very happy new year as well.

" All it will do, if I take the bait to follow this red herring with you, is produce a prolonged discussion and, in all probability, discover nothing of use"

How do we handle these red herrings? Because they seem to take off from the assumptions and learnings we have made and seem to pose a relevant/logical question. Not encouraging them is all fine, but there is always this feeling of incompleteness and the mind tries to answer these questions. Of course, the whole point of what happens in suicide is just a thought. There is no self involved in any of this.

Given that you've specifically confirmed that you can't find any managing or controlling entity, can you explain why you can then entertain the possibility of there being such an entity? Isn't that a bit like discovering for a fact that there's no Santa and then, shortly afterwards, declaring "Hey, you know what. I think I actually saw Santa in the local mall. No, I really do think it could have been him!'

I think it could be just a phenomenon of recency. The more I try to see that there is no self in various situations, I think it will be easy to not fall into this trap in future.

So, can you find a self as or contained within 'your body' in direct experience? If so, where is it? How does it appear, and what does it do? How does it function?

No no. There is no self contained in the body in direct experience. There just are sense arising and these are experienced as 'direct experience'.

Have you been able to find, a ‘self’ that is the ‘experiencer’?
Or a self that is the doer, or can control what happens?
Or a self that ‘makes’ decisions?
Or a self who ‘does the thinking’?

No to all the above questions

Is the "body" just another thought label for sensations (namely tactile & kinesthetic)?

Yes

Are the five body senses made to arise or experienced by this ‘self’?

No, because there is no 'self'. There is just direct experience.

Is there doubt or unclarity that in all these cases the ‘self’ is nothing other than a mental fabrication?
Are there any doubts about seeing through the illusion of separate self?

We discussed about illusion of self in direct experiences (including thought), choices, decision making and body. But how do we resolve feelings - like love, anger, hatred etc.?

Regards
J

[moondog]

Hi Jason,

How do we handle these red herrings? Because they seem to take off from the assumptions and learnings we have made and seem to pose a relevant/logical question. Not encouraging them is all fine, but there is always this feeling of incompleteness and the mind tries to answer these questions. Of course, the whole point of what happens in suicide is just a thought. There is no self involved in any of this.

But how do we resolve feelings - like love, anger, hatred etc.?

I've grouped your two questions together because they basically seem to be about the same thing: strong feelings/emotions and persistent thoughts with strong feelings/emotions attached, arising and seemingly dominating 'your' awareness, despite the fact that you've seen that there just ain't no self nowhere.

Even though there's clearly no self entity, every one of us has particular and unique personality and character traits and habits, the fruition of permutations of an almost infinite number of prior conditions going right back in time. It's almost inevitable that, when we look forward to what liberation from belief in a separate self will be like, we build in expectations that what we deem to be unpleasant or negative emotions, feelings or thoughts will no longer arise, or at least not bother us. However seeing through the illusion of self means just that, no more and no less. Whenever we look for a real, existing 'me' we'll see for sure that there's (still) not one/no-one there. It doesn't mean that all our habitual worries, obsessions, fears and other 'negative' emotions will suddenly stop. Our habit energies don't just grind to a halt like that. But, because we now know for sure that there's no 'me' (or indeed, anyone else!) responsible for or to blame for or feel guilty about any these apparently negative arisings, these arisings have nothing to feed on, cease to misappropriate energy and attention,and are seen for what they are, just impersonal arisings, that then subside, like everything does. They become less 'sticky' and diminish, along with our suffering, as a direct consequence. How quickly that happens depends on 'each person's' makeup. So, really, there's nothing to resolve, and no-one to resolve anything.

So to recap, essentially, seeing clearly that there is no self and accepting that, in the same way that you accept that Santa doesn't exist, is completely independent of, and unconnected to, whether or not you still experience anxiety, anger, doubt etc. Such feelings and thoughts are only relevant in this context if you give them credence as real and true, believing that they are created by/part of 'you', and so allowing them to function as a distraction from actually seeing.

Given that you've specifically confirmed that you can't find any managing or controlling entity, can you explain why you can then entertain the possibility of there being such an entity? Isn't that a bit like discovering for a fact that there's no Santa and then, shortly afterwards, declaring "Hey, you know what. I think I actually saw Santa in the local mall. No, I really do think it could have been him!'

I think it could be just a phenomenon of recency. The more I try to see that there is no self in various situations, I think it will be easy to not fall into this trap in future.

Exactly right. That's certainly what I found, and fits in with what I've said above. Just keep looking, looking, looking at you actual experience.

Your answers to all of the sweep-up questions are just fine; straightforward and unambiguous. You cannot find a self anywhere.

Just looking from a different perspective and, as always, from direct experience:

With "you" revealed as a thought story, what remains?

What experiences?

What thinks?

What does?

What is aware?

Pete x

[Toonami]

Hi Pete,
Thanks for the explanation. Yes, the residual energy theory is acceptable and clarifies a lot. I have a direct question - which is when exactly do we consider crossing the gate? Is it when the recognition of no-self as happened or are there any other stages to it? From your experience, when and how exactly did you recognize that you crashed the gate?

With "you" revealed as a thought story, what remains?

Life as usual, just without the 'I'. Thoughts, feelings, sensations, experiences - all of these exist but it is independent of any self. They just take place and life is lived through this body.
At the core of it -'life' remains and for this body, living happens till death takes over.
The question 'who am I?' looks funny, as there is no 'I' to further discover 'who am I?'.

What experiences?
There is just life experience happening through this body.

What thinks?
Nothing, thoughts arise and go down seemingly out of nowhere. It will continue to do so, until 'life' exists in this body.

What does?
There is no doer. Action is done by a combination of mental energy of the brain and physical energy of the body without any self acting or deciding on what to act.

What is aware?
Awareness just exists. Life is aware of itself through this constitution of Jason's(just for reference) body and mind and it will continue to do so till he is alive.

Regards
J

[moondog]

Hi Jason,

Thanks for the explanation. Yes, the residual energy theory is acceptable and clarifies a lot.

Good, I'm glad.

when exactly do we consider crossing the gate? Is it when the recognition of no-self as happened or are there any other stages to it? From your experience, when and how exactly did you recognize that you crashed the gate?

I'm not sure whether there are stages to this, except in as much as one looks in all the areas where self might be and, gradually, by stages, sees where the self definitely isn't, until there's nowhere it can be, just as you have been doing here. Because this gradual discovery is entirely experiential and therefore irrefutable it is then known that there is no self. I-thoughts may well continue to arise, as may thoughts that say things like, 'This can't be it, it's too simple/easy' or 'I was simply fooling myself, I haven't really seen' etc. This happened to me for a while, but I knew that these were merely unsubstantiated thoughts. And whenever I looked at what was actually happening in this moment, I could never find 'me'. After a while, such thoughts lost any remaining power.

However, that's just my experience, others, including you, will differ to varying degrees. Crossing through the Gateless Gate, which is just knowing for sure that there is no self-entity and never has been, can happen with a bang, or very gently, hardly noticed. But exactly how it happens isn't really important.

If, when you look, you can find no self, and you know and fully accept that to be the way it is, and always has been, despite any mischievous thoughts that may persist (because you know them to be just that and no more), you have seen through the illusion of a separate self, you've crossed the Gate. It's that simple.

Your latest answers to my questions indicate to me that you have definitely seen that there's no self. However, in the end, it's not for me to say. Only you can be sure.

Do you now have any doubts about having seen through the illusion of a separate self?

Pete x

[Toonami]

Thanks for sharing your experience Pete.

Do you now have any doubts about having seen through the illusion of a separate self?

No, there are no doubts about having seen through this illusion.

But still I can't believe that I have crashed the gate already. As you said there are thoughts that are trying to laugh this off like 'This can't be it. It can't be so simple. You anyway have red herrings(like suicide).' etc. These are the residual thoughts, which will die gradually with the truth seen. But, Somehow at this point, I'm not having the full satisfaction that I have already crossed the gate. For example I quote one of the member's experience in this site itself shared in the 'Home' section-

"At first, everything was so new, clear, and bright. Suddenly what is inside me, versus what is outside me, felt irrelevant. Life appeared as a trip, with a watcher. I was spinning, out of control, trying to grasp onto anything I could. I didn’t sleep much for weeks, often waking in the middle of the night, having the battle of my life, all in my head “what is real? Is this all a dream and I am real? Or is this all real, but ‘I’ am not?”. It was like two worlds colliding, having the battle of a lifetime. "
I have not experienced anything as dramatic as this.

I'm willing to accept the fact that as a guide you can handhold only till this point and I need to reinforce and recognize the truth from now on under various situations.

Regards
J