The Gate

Hello Kevin, I made a pretty long reply in work today and I thought I posted it. But it's not here. Obviously I didn't press post reply at the end or something.mi do not have time now to repeat it but I will check tomorrow. There is a slim chance the post is still on my pc because I did not shut it down.
Denis.

No problem, Denis.
Thanks for letting me know.

Hello Kevin,

I lost the post from yesterday, so here it is again :

Firstly, i found the 3 questions below to be more subtle than the experiments with DE and touch/taste/sound etc. But then i said to myself there's nothing subtle about them at all, they're just very simple, straightforward questions. And yet trying to answer them puts me in a place where i feel my head's about to explode. I was comparing the exercise of looking for an "I" in DE to the previous exercises with DE and the senses. It occurred to me that in all the previous exercises (which i am still doing for the sake of re-enforcing the point) there is a referent object to view, when i've finished thinking about the object. My thoughts of an orange can be then compared to the real orange etc. So i thought of the same kind of exercise with "I". Where the hell is the referent object for my thoughts of "I" ? Where is it ? What ? It's just not there !? And i keep looking at this point - just not there ?! Just not there ?! But there is a constant feeling of being here, of something being here. I guess a feeling is ultimately just another thought, with associated body sensations. But there is this paradox of not being able to find a thing, yet feeling intensely that it is here. And of course thought is leaping around all over the place as usual, commenting, creating etc.

I found trying to 'look' at the "I" in DE was very difficult, or maybe i should say very strange. I don't quite know how to say it. In the moments where i was 'looking in DE' (at least i think i was doing it correctly, when i looked back at what i was just doing !) the paradox sort of disappeared. It just stopped mattering. With the thoughts not there, there were no questions. And then of course thoughts come straight back. The bottom line is I'm still looking at your questions. I feel somehow that i'm getting to the bit where the rubber meets the road, but i don't know how or why. It almost seems like something very simple happens when i look, but then instantly i start re-believing thoughts. Rinse-repeat. I'm writing things down now in short sharp sentences, trying to lay the evidence out very clearly about what i'm finding and seeing. Anyway, my answers so far :

In direct experience, can you find an “I” that experiences experience?

No I cannot. Not as a distinct object. Yet there is a feeling that something is here. Or probably more correct to say that thoughts tell me something is here.

Is there a seer separate from the seen?

I can't verify that there is. Senses tell me no. Yet i am slightly hesitant to say "NO". I can accept that there doesn't necessarily need to be a seer, that it could be a total assumption. In fact, scratch that last sentence, based on evidence alone, it IS an assumption.

Is there a hearer that hears?

Same answer as above for the seer.

Denis.

I'll get back to you asap on this Denis.
Might be tomorrow morning.

Hi Denis,

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you.

Yet there is a feeling that something is here. Or probably more correct to say that thoughts tell me something is here.

Who or what are your thoughts talking to?
And how did thought gain the independence and volition to do such a thing?

I can't verify that there is. Senses tell me no. Yet i am slightly hesitant to say "NO". I can accept that there doesn't necessarily need to be a seer, that it could be a total assumption. In fact, scratch that last sentence, based on evidence alone, it IS an assumption.

Struggling is fine, here.
In fact, it's great.
The observations are okay, I get the sense you may be "trying" too hard.
Dismiss thoughts for a bit, and let's slide back into direct experience.
Remember, nothing is happening outside the here and how and in the felt sense.
So, just relax, close your eyes.

When you feel completely settled and in the moment, open your eyes.
Without identifying what image comes, tell me whether there is a seer, or whether seeing is just happening.

* As you have the same answer for hearing, please do the same exercise with hearing.

Tell me what you observed there.

Great stuff, Denis.

Keep up the good work,

Kevin

Hey Denis,

How's it going?

Best,

Kevin

Hi Kevin,

Sorry for not responding sooner. I have been very busy with both home and work.

I think you are right, perhaps i have been over-thinking this and 'trying' to hard. Difficult to drop the habits of a lifetime i guess.

Who or what are your thoughts talking to?
And how did thought gain the independence and volition to do such a thing?

The thoughts are not talking 'to' anything. All that can be said is that they are perceived, known. There is an assumption that there is a thing here knowing them. On further looking, the idea that there is an 'assumption that there is a thing here knowing them', is yet another thought. It starts to look more and more that thoughts are really not worth sh*t. There is a sense of 'being here' and there is what i will call 'stuff' - sensed objects, including thoughts. There is a tremendous buy-in to the thoughts. A constant referral to the thoughts. Thoughts are constantly adding a dialogue/overlay to what is just "stuff happening".

When i look closer at what i just wrote - "there is a sense of being here". I can't actually say what "a sense of being here" is. What does it really mean ? There is not a thing that can be identified as "sense of being here". It seems to resolve down to just what's here, now, or just "this". It's just immediate.


Thoughts cannot have the qualities of independence or volition. They're ephemeral. They just pop up from nothing and go back to nothing. The more i look at them, the more they become meaningless fluff.

I need more time with this particular line of enquiry. So i will carry on.

And after writing the above sentence, the obvious thought occurs "well, that last sentence must be meaningless garbage as well. So really, i don't need to carry on with anything !...". It's like a snake swallowing it's own tail.

When you feel completely settled and in the moment, open your eyes.
Without identifying what image comes, tell me whether there is a seer, or whether seeing is just happening.

* As you have the same answer for hearing, please do the same exercise with hearing.

Tell me what you observed there.

Seeing is just happening. It's just sort of "on". Likewise hearing is just "on". There's an immediacy to the sight or sound. It's just 'there'. There is no need for a seer or hearer. They're unnecessary.

Hi Denis,

Good stuff.
I think you're right, a little more time in inquiry with the thoughts is a good idea.
Let's try it a little differently though.

Let's approach this from direct experience, like we did with hearing and seeing.

Find some stillness.
Then when a thought arises check in.

• 
  
• Where, if anywhere, did that thought come from?
  
• Who, if anyone, is having that thought?
  
• Who, if anyone, is believing that thought?
  
• What, if anything, created that thought?

Best,

Kevin

How's it going, Denis?

Still with me, Denis?