The Gate

The visual cues and language cortex/understanding words are just ideas. There is no separate 'I.' There is only hearing and seeing. There are only thoughts, emotions, and other sensations, but there is no central 'I' to find. No witness. The 'I' is just a pattern of thoughts/feelings based on the culmination of all previous sensations; that is "Jeremy."

The visual cues and language cortex/understanding words are just ideas.

Good. Nothing wrong with ideas at all - Just notice that that is what the answer comes from - thought.
It's not something can be established in the experience itself.

There is only hearing and seeing.

Good.
Ok - Range over all the senses then in the same way.
Is there an 'I' smelling? Is there an 'I' tasting?

Touch might be a little more tricky. Is there an 'I' here 'feeling'.
Is the body doing that?

Try this:
Close your eyes - It's easier to focus on the sensation.
Reach out and place the hand on a desk or other flat surface.
Now . . . go to the experience itself.

Inquire . . . in the experience, is the hand feeling the table?
Is there an 'I' doing the feeling?
Are there two clear things in the experience itself, a hand or body doing the feeling, and a table or surface being felt?
Or is there just 'feeling'?

After this - Tell me - In the statement 'I feel' - What is 'I' exactly?
Something that can be found? Or an idea or thought?

Xain ♥

Hmm, there doesn't seem to be an 'I' feeling, only the feeling itself. I don't know what 'I' is. I suppose it is just a thought. Is there a way to be aware of this all the time? Is it an epiphany of some sort, or does it take practice?

Hmm, there doesn't seem to be an 'I' feeling, only the feeling itself.

Ok, Good.

I don't know what 'I' is. I suppose it is just a thought.

I didn't think you were interested in 'supposing anything' - I thought you wanted to be certain.
To realise?

Is there a way to be aware of this all the time?

What is this 'I' that is aware of something?

Is it an epiphany of some sort, or does it take practice?

Practise for whom?

Xain ♥

I didn't think you were interested in 'supposing anything' - I thought you wanted to be certain.
To realise?

I do. Suppose is not a great word to use in this situation.

What is this 'I' that is aware of something?

It's just a thought. Somehow, each of my 5 senses seem to be separate entities in a way, as are my thoughts and emotions, yet they are all working together to form 1 experience. Whatever the "I" is, is just a thought. So when I feel something with my hand for this exercise, there is just the feeling, but there is another layer where I'm thinking to myself "I'm focusing on the sensation of feeling." If I'm feeling something outside of this exercise, I'm typically not going to think of it in this way, I'll just do it. Still, I cannot get past the illusion that I am controlling my movements in some way. Either I am my thoughts, emotions, and sensations in all of their entirety, or I am nothing at all. Either way, there is no "experiencer," only the experience itself.

Practise for whom?

Practice for no-one, haha. Whatever controls the awareness/focus. Though, there is only the awareness/focus itself, but is there nothing guiding it? What is controlling the experience? That is what I would call 'I' if I had to pinpoint it now, but I can't seem to find it.

I do. Suppose is not a great word to use in this situation.

It's cool.
If you are serious about this enquiry, I want you to reach a point where it is completely clear what has been realised.

Somehow, each of my 5 senses seem to be separate entities in a way, as are my thoughts and emotions, yet they are all working together to form 1 experience.

Sure - That seems fair.

Either way, there is no "experiencer," only the experience itself.

Good. Interesting isn't it? :-)
Rather than 'there is no experiencer', would it be better to say that any experiencer that could be suggested is only an idea about one - A thought? Hence 'I experience' is just an idea / a thought popping up suggesting it?

I'll just do it. Still, I cannot get past the illusion that I am controlling my movements in some way.

Well let's look at that very thing now.

Try this next simple exercise.
As you sit there, choose one of the arms - It doesn't matter which one.
Then, when you feel you wish to, raise the arm that you chose into the air.

Do this as many times as you like.
I want you to examine the experience of doing this itself, and each time inquire . . .
What is choosing the arm? Is it something that can be found?
What is causing the arm to move - Controlling the muscles - making it move?
Is whatever is controlling that arm something that can be found in the experience itself?

Xain ♥

Okay, yes I want to fully realize what's happening here.

When I do the arm exercise, there is a hint of a feeling and a thought, and there is the movement of one of my arms an instant later. There is nothing tangible choosing or moving the arm. It's funny because the thing that controls and chooses the arm is what I would call my self, yet it is no where to be found. The self is only another feeling, no?

I noticed earlier that when I move around normally, my thoughts are somewhere else completely, and the body moves on its own.

When I do the arm exercise, there is a hint of a feeling and a thought, and there is the movement of one of my arms an instant later.

Could it be like this?

1) A thought appears suggesting 'I am going to move my right arm in the air"
2) The arm rises into the air
3) A thought appears 'Done - I moved my right arm into the air"

If this kind-of matches what is happening for you, can you see the assumption?

There is nothing tangible choosing or moving the arm. It's funny because the thing that controls and chooses the arm is what I would call my self, yet it is no where to be found.

Ok - Now is 'myself' or 'I' something that can be found doing it - Or is it a thought / an idea about what is doing it?

I noticed earlier that when I move around normally, my thoughts are somewhere else completely, and the body moves on its own.

This is good to notice!

When the action is 'concentrated on', like the example with making the arm rise, strong thoughts suggest that there is an 'I' choosing and controlling - In 'everyday life' life driving a car, the body does it's thing without thought all automatically - And yet, when thought kicks in, thought suggests 'I just drove my car'.
You may notice that thought always happens before or after the event. This is why we examine the immediate moment - Right now - To see what is happening and compare that to what is suggested to be happening by the thoughts and ideas appearing.

You could try a kooky little experiment. Take a day-to-day activity like making a cup of coffee.
Go into the kitchen, and just before making it suggest this:
'Right, now 'I' am not going to control the body making a cup of coffee, nor am 'I' going to prevent it from making a cup of coffee either. I want the cup of coffee to be made, so let's see if the body can do that'
See what happens . . .

This leads up to some further 'bigger' questions.
Is there a separate self here that has ever had any choice in anything?
Is there a separate self here that had any control over anything?
Or could these all just be 'ideas and thoughts' suggesting it?

Xain ♥

Could it be like this?

1) A thought appears suggesting 'I am going to move my right arm in the air"
2) The arm rises into the air
3) A thought appears 'Done - I moved my right arm into the air"

If this kind-of matches what is happening for you, can you see the assumption?

Yes, this is exactly correct, although my thought may not be so much "Done" as it is deciding which arm to move next.

Ok - Now is 'myself' or 'I' something that can be found doing it - Or is it a thought / an idea about what is doing it?

Theere is no 'myself' or 'I' to be found doing it. The idea of 'myself' is just that, an idea or thought, a feeling of sorts.

You could try a kooky little experiment. Take a day-to-day activity like making a cup of coffee...
See what happens . . .

I was not able to make coffee today, so I did the experiment by pouring a glass of water. There was a strange feeling of emptiness, and the thoughts seemed more scattered. Almost like there were layers, fighting each other. "I'm not going to resist, I'm resisting, I'm just doing it." Then there was the layer that appeared to be empty as everything played out.

This leads up to some further 'bigger' questions.
Is there a separate self here that has ever had any choice in anything?
Is there a separate self here that had any control over anything?
Or could these all just be 'ideas and thoughts' suggesting it?

Thoughts and ideas give the illusion of of a separate self, yet the illusion still persists. Knowing this, the thoughts are not 'I' because they are not under control and only point to things that are happening, happened in the past, or will happen. 'I' am not the body because the body acts on its own accord.

The heart beats on its own completely regardless of thought, but it appears that 'I' can blink and breath with a thought. Hmm... how can this be? The thought to blink or breath sporadically comes from a chain of thoughts, which are formed because the mind is focused on trying to find an 'I'. There is some frustration now. I didn't understand the source of people's frustration while reading the Gateless Gatecrashers, but now the feeling is here.

Yes, this is exactly correct, although my thought may not be so much "Done" as it is deciding which arm to move next.

I understand - Sure thing :-)
I gave the example so that you can see that there are thoughts arising suggesting what is doing it ('I'), but examining the experience itself tells you nothing about what is causing it to happen - An 'I' can't be found.

Thoughts and ideas give the illusion of of a separate self, yet the illusion still persists. Knowing this, the thoughts are not 'I' because they are not under control and only point to things that are happening, happened in the past, or will happen.

Yes. Well done. Excellent!

The heart beats on its own completely regardless of thought, but it appears that 'I' can blink and breath with a thought. Hmm... how can this be?

Is there an 'I' that can blink and breath with or without a thought occurring?

Let's take a quick look at thoughts right now.

Think a thought - Any thought will do.
Now . . . although in normal speech we would say 'I thought that thought', can you identify what this 'I' is.
Is there an 'I' you can find creating thoughts? Or would the 'I' in the line 'I think' be an idea / thought itself (and not something to be found doing it?).
Where do these thoughts appear? Is there a definite location.
Are these thoughts 'yours'? What makes it so?
Who or what is experiencing the thoughts?
Is there any control over thoughts at all? What is controlling?
(Surely if we had control over thoughts, we could choose to have nothing but pleasant thoughts all day - Is it like that?)

I didn't understand the source of people's frustration while reading the Gateless Gatecrashers, but now the feeling is here.

I understand. You are doing extremely well so far. Keep exactly on the track that you've been on so far
I would suggest that this frustration is 'cognitive dissonance'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
. . . where we attempt to hold two conflicting beliefs at once.
On the one hand, we are certain that there is an 'I', a separate self here doing stuff.
One the other hand, when we look, we seem certain that an 'I', a separate self can't be found doing stuff.

Xain ♥

[quote="Xain]
Think a thought - Any thought will do.
Is there an 'I' you can find creating thoughts? Or would the 'I' in the line 'I think' be an idea / thought itself (and not something to be found doing it?).
Where do these thoughts appear? Is there a definite location.
Are these thoughts 'yours'? What makes it so?
Who or what is experiencing the thoughts?
Is there any control over thoughts at all? What is controlling?
(Surely if we had control over thoughts, we could choose to have nothing but pleasant thoughts all day - Is it like that?)[/quote]

The I cannot be found creating thoughts, it is an idea or thought itself.

There is no definite location of the thoughts.

There isn't really a who experiencing the thoughts, only the experience itself, if that makes sense.

I can't locate anything controlling the thoughts. They are happening, but who is pulling the strings, a God of sort perhaps? Regardless, thought is out of 'my' control. Hmm...

Sorry for the double post. My last reply came out messy, and you haven't been on the past couple of days, so I figured I'd clean up my last post a little bit while I have the opportunity. Hope all is well with you!

Is there an 'I' that can blink and breath with or without a thought occurring?

Once examined more closely with this question in mind, there is no 'I' controlling the blink or breath. When focusing on controlling the breath or blink, there is a thought which comes before, just like the arm experiment. Otherwise, the body does it all on its own, and the thoughts point to something else. I'm wondering what focus is though, is this a separate part from the 5 senses, thought and emotion? It feels like it may just be a heavier/more illusory type of thought.

Think a thought - Any thought will do.
Now . . . although in normal speech we would say 'I thought that thought', can you identify what this 'I' is.

The 'I' is just a way to point to where the thought came from. It would get confusing if people, when telling a story, said, "Then 'Hello' was said, then 'Hello' was said back." Instead of saying "Jack said 'Hello,' then Jill said 'Hello' back."

Is there an 'I' you can find creating thoughts? Or would the 'I' in the line 'I think' be an idea / thought itself (and not something to be found doing it?).

The I cannot be found creating thoughts, it is an idea or thought itself.

Where do these thoughts appear? Is there a definite location.

There is no definite location of the thoughts.

Are these thoughts 'yours'? What makes it so?

They are only mine in as much as all of my emotions, thoughts, memories, sensations, etc. are, which when observed do not "belong" to anyone at all. These things are not graspable.

Who or what is experiencing the thoughts?

There isn't really a who experiencing the thoughts, only the experience itself, if that makes sense.

Is there any control over thoughts at all? What is controlling?
(Surely if we had control over thoughts, we could choose to have nothing but pleasant thoughts all day - Is it like that?)

I can't locate anything controlling the thoughts. They are happening, but who is pulling the strings, a God of sort perhaps? Regardless, thought is out of 'my' control. Hmm... It'd be nice to think pleasant thoughts all day though, haha.

I understand. You are doing extremely well so far. Keep exactly on the track that you've been on so far
I would suggest that this frustration is 'cognitive dissonance'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
. . . where we attempt to hold two conflicting beliefs at once.
On the one hand, we are certain that there is an 'I', a separate self here doing stuff.
One the other hand, when we look, we seem certain that an 'I', a separate self can't be found doing stuff.

I was once a psychology major before switching to music, so I am very familiar with the concept of cognitive dissonance, especially since the heavy bout I dealt with after leaving Christianity. I never thought to view this newfound frustration as a part of cognitive dissonance, cool! I feel your guidance is working well, as the concept of 'I' wears more and more thin with each new message I read from you.

Really I should say, "There is the feeling of familiarity with the concept of cognitive dissonance. There is a feeling of the guidance working, and a feeling of the concept of 'I' wearing thin." Or something along those lines.

The 'I' is just a way to point to where the thought came from. It would get confusing if people, when telling a story, said, "Then 'Hello' was said, then 'Hello' was said back." Instead of saying "Jack said 'Hello,' then Jill said 'Hello' back."

It would!
And there is certainly nothing wrong with an 'I' as a pointer / a thought / an idea. But can we see that it is ALL it is?
When it is believed to be a 'real' thing (and not just a pointer) like 'I am useless', 'I am a bad person', 'I will achieve nothing' - It can appear to cause pain and suffering.

They are happening, but who is pulling the strings, a God of sort perhaps?

I thought you'd just left Christianity ;-)
Well, you want a definite realisation - So can you definitely find something 'pulling the strings'?
Can you find a 'God' pulling the strings?
Can you find an 'I' pulling the strings?
Or could both 'God' and 'I' just be thoughts and ideas about what was doing it, which cannot be found when examined or searched for?

Really I should say, "There is the feeling of familiarity with the concept of cognitive dissonance. There is a feeling of the guidance working, and a feeling of the concept of 'I' wearing thin." Or something along those lines.

Why change language? Why not use 'I'?

So what is 'I'? Something 'real' that exists outside of thoughts?
Or just a thought itself?

What 'I' started this conversation with me?
What 'I' has looked into any of the investigations here?
Is there a separate self here right now? - Yes or No?
Can you find anything other thoughts and ideas that there is one?

Xain ♥

And there is certainly nothing wrong with an 'I' as a pointer / a thought / an idea. But can we see that it is ALL it is?

I want to say yes. For the most part. I understand that I is just a pointer, now as for any kind of shift in the way I am experiencing everything, nothing has changed.

They are happening, but who is pulling the strings, a God of sort perhaps?

I thought you'd just left Christianity ;-)
Well, you want a definite realisation - So can you definitely find something 'pulling the strings'?
Can you find a 'God' pulling the strings?
Can you find an 'I' pulling the strings?
Or could both 'God' and 'I' just be thoughts and ideas about what was doing it, which cannot be found when examined or searched for?

Hahaha that made me chuckle. Christianity is a heavy thought to leave behind. It baffles me to think there is no God at all, other than this chaotic energy that happened to form everything by chance, which is a possibility. On the other hand, 'I' could very well be in control, or there could be a God. Who knows? They're all just different ideas anyway. I can't find anything pulling the strings at all, not God nor 'I', only thoughts and ideas. There is an energy of some sort sustaining everything that is perceived, however there is no way of knowing if that energy is intelligent.

Why change language? Why not use 'I'?

There's no point really, I was mostly just having fun with this new way of thinking. It would prove difficult indeed to talk in that manner all of the time.

So what is 'I'? Something 'real' that exists outside of thoughts?
Or just a thought itself?

What 'I' started this conversation with me?
What 'I' has looked into any of the investigations here?
Is there a separate self here right now? - Yes or No?
Can you find anything other thoughts and ideas that there is one?

Feeling a hard push from you on this one. 'I' is not something real. 'I' is just a thought, a pointer. What started this conversation, what started the search for an 'I'? It just happened like everything else. There's no separate self to be found, only thoughts and ideas about one. Gah, what is there left to realize?

It seems I understand the concept logically, but not experientially.