The Gate

Thank you for your answers, Rhett.
Things seem to be going smoothly for you, that's nice.
I would like you to look to the role language has in creating the illusion of the existence of a separate self. Ilona has a good exercise about labeling in her blog - http://markedeternal.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/labels.html

I will also write it here:

• First write what you are experiencing right now using words I and me. Get right to the point, no past or future fantasy, just plain description of here now.
  
  Like this-
  I am laying in bed. I am hearing the rain, I am typing these words..
  
  Do it for 10 minutes. Watch the body, are there any sensations of tightening or relaxing?
  
  Then for next 10 minutes write without words I and me. Just describe the experience as it is happening using verbs:
  Waiting for next thought, typing, breathing, blinking, hearing the rain.
  
  Again watch what is happening in the body.
  
  Now compare the two ways to label experience - is one truer than the other? If so, which one? What is here without labels? Do labels affect the experience or just describe it?

Please, answer the above questions after doing the exercise.

Now compare the two ways to label experience - is one truer than the other? If so, which one? What is here without labels? Do labels affect the experience or just describe it?[/list]

Please, answer the above questions after doing the exercise.

That was a fun exercise, thanks for pointing it out.

Here's what was found when comparing the two paragraphs:
After completing the second exercise, reading the questions at the end then, skimming though both paragraphs written, the words "I am" in front of everything listed in the first paragraph make it feel "separate" for lack of a better term.It reads like somebody else is going through the events.

Not certain which one is "truer" but the second option feels like there is no "middle man." Which sort of answers the next question. Like the article mentions, the second paragraph more accurately (truer?) describes life because it is much more direct. Further, labels do no affect experience they simply describe it. The experience is there regardless of an "I am." As an example, "I am hearing an airplane" vs "hearing an airplane" either way there's an airplane being heard. The "I am" part feels completely unnecessary when talking about direct experience and the event itself.

Thank you, Rhett!
We talked a little about body, thoughts, control, language.
Is there something that you would like to look at next?
Is there something in your experience that you think is a you?

Thank you, Rhett!
We talked a little about body, thoughts, control, language.
Is there something that you would like to look at next?
Is there something in your experience that you think is a you?

I appreciate you helping me a ton Sandra.

It's strange, I feel like I understand and agree with all of the concepts, however feel they haven't become a part of me. I understand using "I" and "me" are only referring to the character, yet I still use them the same way without thinking of what I've learned recently. It's only after the fact, or if I catch myself and remind myself of what I've learned that I'll look at the events from the perspective I've learned recently. The mass majority of the time I'll forget to apply what I've learned in the moment. It feels too forced to be considered a part of me. For instance: I'll take things I usually find appealing (or insulting) personally and feel the usual emotions behind them that I have, however later on after the emotion fades away I'll realize that it's simply "emotions flaring at ______" which is just life.

Even more specifically, I personally have strong feelings when somebody promises something, gives me their word, but when it comes down to do it does the opposite. The moment I find out they've broken their promises, I'm more than usual. I'll realize how much I dislike it, because "great here we go again" but then I'll realize, maybe shortly after, that "I'm" not upset, that it's just that "broken promises leads to being more upset than usual" which is a part of life/direct experience. I'll even think that the person who have wronged me has no control over their own thoughts, that they'll do what they want to because it's a learned experience for them, even though they have learned the opposite as well. If there's no thinker in me to control my actions (which are a result of thoughts I have no control over), then I wouldn't expect them to control their thoughts either. Life just happened in this way right now. Time to accept it and move on.

The opposite of the above is also true: I'll let myself go and feel that life is taking over anyway, that I can't control my thoughts. I feel free for a good 10 minutes and letting what happens happen. Then next thing I know I'll look again, and I'm taking things personally as a self.

Maybe I've studied it, but have yet to really internalize it. Its like you've mentioned earlier that I must do the action rather than think about it.

I appreciate you helping me a ton Sandra.

It's a pleasure.

It seems there are some expectations that, by doing this inquiry, life will become different than it is and you will be different than you are. If you can't find a separate you, how could you become any different? (quite a paradoxical question, isn't it?).

So, what can you find in your experience that is this you that should become different?

The mass majority of the time I'll forget to apply what I've learned in the moment.

What are you trying to apply?

It's strange, I feel like I understand and agree with all of the concepts, however feel they haven't become a part of me.

What are you expecting to happen?

OK,I hate to do this to you, but the unbolded is how I answered the questions first. The bolded is how I answered the questions looking back at it, kind of like proof reading it. Just like this bit of my post was added afterward. I apologize for making it more complex than it should be!

It's a pleasure.

It seems there are some expectations that, by doing this inquiry, life will become different than it is and you will be different than you are. If you can't find a separate you, how could you become any different? (quite a paradoxical question, isn't it?).

So, what can you find in your experience that is this you that should become different?

II see whee you're coming from, that makes perfect sense. I can’t find a self, so I can’t be any different than what I am, but there’s no “me” or "I am" in the first place so I can’t expect anything different from something that isn't/wasn't anything.

What are you trying to apply?

I’m trying to apply what was learned recently, and how to view life as we’ve discussed/as I’ve found through “my" new experiences. However it just struck me: I guess I really can’t expect to apply anything, because I have no control in the first place. No matter the knowledge gained, life will happen how it wants. Kind of like the picking a number exercise. If I were to choose a number from 1-100 and chose 50 because it’s in the middle, what stopped me from choosing 10 because 100 divided by 10 is 10, or 2 because 100 divided by 50 is 2, or just a random 51, because well 51! I get it now. Even after gaining knowledge by direct experience, applying it is out of my control. It almost seems like anything learned is learned for the sake of being “good to know” or just for the sake of learning. If you happen to use it or not is out of your hands. What a conundrum. Life really just does happen.

Now I answered this next question before I added the second sentence and on from the previous question.

What are you expecting to happen?

Have no idea what to expect, but since we talked about nothing should be different because there’s no me in the first place, I should expect nothing different.

However, answering that last question, it apparent that I shouldn’t expect anything to happen. I’ve learned some great things the last few days. Mainly that it’s out of my hands. So gaining this knowledge has been great, whether it's applied in some cases or not though isn't "my" fault because I'm not in control, because there is no "me" to control anything.

I loved reading your post. Thank you. Sorry for being a pain in the a** but i would love to read some more examples from your experience about what makes you SEE that life is happening without a separate you. How do you know that what you're saying is true? What can you see going on? Give me some descriptions of how you see life happening.

I loved reading your post. Thank you. Sorry for being a pain in the a** but i would love to read some more examples from your experience about what makes you SEE that life is happening without a separate you. How do you know that what you're saying is true? What can you see going on? Give me some descriptions of how you see life happening.

This isn't any trouble at all Sandra, how can it be? This is truly incredible.

So a great example was just what happened after I wrote my last post.

Right now I’m trying to learn how to program/code. I have a set schedule I am determined to follow in order to learn this skill (1 cumulative hour of watching and following along to udemy.com courses). I do this in controlled 20 minute bursts where I try and only focus on programming for 20 minutes and limit distractions. I do this three times a day which adds up to an hour of it thus meeting my goal. (I believe and try to implement a practice that small steps lead to giant leaps when you look back at the progress accumulated vs trying to take on big chunks at a time).

Now seeing that I have had a pattern lately of sticking to the task, it would be uncharacteristic (assuming there was a me that is uncharacteristic) for me to deter and do some leisure web browsing during a 20 minute session. However, that’s exactly what happened this morning. It also has happened numerous times in the past year as well, so no need to blame this on helping me through this journey of liberation!

Here’s the difference between those times and this time though, I realized that I have no control over getting distracted or not. If I stuck to the script and focused for 20 minutes, I'd have no control over that either. Fact is I know
how to stick to the script/program/schedule and I know how to be distracted. But it’s not in my control over which one I do. If I focused, that wasn’t what “I” chose and if I got distracted that wasn’t what “I” chose either. They were both actions, and actions come from thoughts. Discipline is an action/thought and so is being distracted. Which one I took (being distracted in this case) was out of my hands, as is when I have focused instead. This will be the case when I focus in the future or when I get distracted in the future. Thoughts are something I have no control over. I can’t expect to apply anything I’ve learned because I can’t control if I do apply it in the moment or not. Because of that, that explains why there is no self. Because if there was a self, I’d be able to control the thought at the time and sway it a certain way.

In the past I would’ve blamed myself. Today, I felt like it wasn't my fault because there is no “me” to be at fault, because there was no "me" to make that decision.

Thank you for sharing, Rhett!

These are my suggestions of things to look at:

We usually think we make things happen because there is a you thinking about what to do. Let's look closer at this supposition.

When an action happens, try to find what is causing the action. Is it a you? Is it thinking?

You don't need to use memories to look at this - look to what is going on right now.

What can you see happening when you raise an arm, for example? Is the movement of the arm caused by a you thinking that you will raise the arm?

When writing a sentence, do you need to use thinking as a "tool" for letters to appear on the screen? You are writting the thoughts that pop up at the moment, but is it thinking that makes the fingers move, controls what keys are pressed and what words to write?

What can you see happening if you look at a thought? Does the thought "x" in itself has the power to do something? A thought can be "raise your arm now" - does this thought has the power to make the arm go up?

What can a thought do? Does thinking make things happen or is thinking more like a commentary about what is going on?

Thank you for sharing, Rhett!

These are my suggestions of things to look at:

We usually think we make things happen because there is a you thinking about what to do. Let's look closer at this supposition.

When an action happens, try to find what is causing the action. Is it a you? Is it thinking?

You don't need to use memories to look at this - look to what is going on right now.

What can you see happening when you raise an arm, for example? Is the movement of the arm caused by a you thinking that you will raise the arm?

When writing a sentence, do you need to use thinking as a "tool" for letters to appear on the screen? You are writting the thoughts that pop up at the moment, but is it thinking that makes the fingers move, controls what keys are pressed and what words to write?

What can you see happening if you look at a thought? Does the thought "x" in itself has the power to do something? A thought can be "raise your arm now" - does this thought has the power to make the arm go up?

What can a thought do? Does thinking make things happen or is thinking more like a commentary about what is going on?

Raising my arm and typing feel automatic. No need for thoughts to execute either action.

From what I see, I can't find a thought with my eyes and thoughts can't affect anything real by themselves.

It feels like thoughts come after the actions. Kind of like actions are spontaneous and the thoughts like you said are commentary.

What changed since we started this conversation (if anything :) ?
When you look, can you see that the separate self is an illusion?
Is there something that feels unclear? Where could we look next?

What changed since we started this conversation (if anything :) ?
When you look, can you see that the separate self is an illusion?
Is there something that feels unclear? Where could we look next?

Nothing has really changed. Which makes perfect sense. Meaning it's not supposed to be some major breakthrough?

Yes. The self cannot be directly sensed and is imaginary. Life just happens, thoughts simply describe/are commentary. It's also unpredictable, no sense trying to control it.

Don't think anywhere else needs to be looked into after the self is found to be an illusion, correct? Is there more to the journey?

Is this what they mean by gateless gate? That it's kind of just right in front of "you" the whole time?

After it's been "proven" that the self doesn't exist, is that supposed to be the "shift"?

Just to be sure, the "self" refers to whatever is labeling thoughts and thinking it's "you" right? It's the "part" that thinks it's in control? Meaning that the point of this whole journey is realizing that control is an illusion, and if control is an illusion then that means there is no controller. The "self" is this make believe controller and proving that there is no controller by proving that thoughts can't be controlled means there's no self?

Nothing has really changed. Which makes perfect sense. Meaning it's not supposed to be some major breakthrough?

You can expect a breakthrough but why should reality happen as you expect it to happen? :)

Don't think anywhere else needs to be looked into after the self is found to be an illusion, correct? Is there more to the journey?

Well, if you're referring to the journey in this forum, when you're 100% sure that the separate self is an illusion, I'm going to ask you if you want to answer the questions we ask to all the clients that have seen the illusion. And, if all is clear, the next step (if you want to) is to join LU groups for sharing of experiences and further investigation. Seeing no self is not necessarily the end of exploration.

Would you say that the pull for seeking is over or much less than it was?

Is this what they mean by gateless gate? That it's kind of just right in front of "you" the whole time?

Where else could it be? There is only this moment to look at. The truth (whatever that is, if it even exists) is here. The tricky part is that sometimes we expect things to be different than they are.

After it's been "proven" that the self doesn't exist, is that supposed to be the "shift"?

The "shift" from what to what? From a reality were there is a self to a reality where there isn't one? How would that happen? What would experienced it? Wouldn't this "shift" be a "mind" trip only?

Just to be sure, the "self" refers to whatever is labeling thoughts and thinking it's "you" right?

"Self" refers to whatever you think a self is - in this inquiry you need to check if your thoughts match your experience. Your definition above is as good as any other.

Meaning that the point of this whole journey is realizing that control is an illusion, and if control is an illusion then that means there is no controller.

Looking at "control" can be an "entering place" to see the illusion. There are many gateless gates to the same place :)

The "self" is this make believe controller and proving that there is no controller by proving that thoughts can't be controlled means there's no self?

You are trying to think this over. It doesn't work like that. You need to look instead, to what is real here and now. Can you find a you with your senses? An entity separate from life that owns and controls a slice of life?

There are a bunch of questions below. Have a look to your experience and answer from there, please. Don't worry with giving the "right" answer. If something in this list stands as unclear just let me know and we will go from there.

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?

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 a separate self?

You can expect a breakthrough but why should reality happen as you expect it to happen? :)

You're exactly right! Can't control what happens.

Well, if you're referring to the journey in this forum, when you're 100% sure that the separate self is an illusion, I'm going to ask you if you want to answer the questions we ask to all the clients that have seen the illusion. And, if all is clear, the next step (if you want to) is to join LU groups for sharing of experiences and further investigation. Seeing no self is not necessarily the end of exploration.

Would you say that the pull for seeking is over or much less than it was?

Yes, much less, if not completely relieved.

The "shift" from what to what? From a reality were there is a self to a reality where there isn't one? How would that happen? What would experienced it? Wouldn't this "shift" be a "mind" trip only?

Yes. The shift would just be a different way of observing things, but then that wouldn't be in the moment anymore would it? That'd be seeing life through a "mind trip," which isn't really seeing life as it is. However, that statement is an expectation itself.

You are trying to think this over. It doesn't work like that. You need to look instead, to what is real here and now. Can you find a you with your senses? An entity separate from life that owns and controls a slice of life?

That's exactly what it was. Too much thinking about it, not enough looking. When looking there is no self to be found. Life is life, can't be controlled and only lived.

There are a bunch of questions below. Have a look to your experience and answer from there, please. Don't worry with giving the "right" answer. If something in this list stands as unclear just let me know and we will go from there.

Appreciated.

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

Nope.

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

Haven't found that either.

Or a self that ‘makes’ decisions?

No to this as well.

Or a self who ‘does the thinking’?

None

Is the "body" just another thought label for sensations?

Do not quite understand this question clearly. Looking at experience, what happens to the body can be described by sensations, certainly.

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

Neither.

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

No.

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

No doubt whatsoever.

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

Don't think so, but unclear about "doubts"? Doubts would be an expectation correct?

Wow completely apologize for the quoting on that last post.