The Gate

No part of the sensation did it. It was logical thought about the experience that told me it belongs to me

Yes, good observation!

The thought that says that a person sitting right next to me doesn't experience the sensation in my foot no matter how close they are, and neither can I experience their sensations.

What if every sensation is unique - not only the ones you label as "my foot" but really every single one...
When you sit next to someone, the person next to you does not experience "my foot" the way you do, but neither does he experience anything else the way you do, right? Does this proof that there is a separate "experiencer" or simply that every experience is unique?

I assume though that you are referring to the experience before any thought about it was constructed. I'm at a loss here, perhaps because I'm not well trained in addressing the experience separately from the thought about it.

There is a certain border that we hit when we try to put what is being experienced into words... We can only get as close as language allows us.
When you look at something, e.g. a cup on the desk, how far can you deconstruct this experience before you are at a lack of more concepts to describe it? What is the most basic ingredient of "seeing" that you can still put a label on?

I find any sensation (sound, touch etc.) to be something so primary, abstract, amorphic and indefinable that answering what is there is just impossible

Yes, true :-)
So you basically generate your own conceptual overlay to what is really undefinable, without form or meaning, right?
Does this undefinable experience itself contain any information about separate entities at all? Does it contain any information about "this is me" or "this is not me"?

No, any experience that comes from supposedly something outside me is the only thing there is at the moment and it can't be anywhere else but the place it is perceived, which is nowhere really.

Yes, ok!
When an experience is perceived, how does that work? There seems to be a mechanism we would label as attention, right? When something happens your body will react automatically, then mental attention focusses on it and a chain of thought follows that tries to describe what is happening...
Lets say you stab your toe, do you have to do something for your foot to move back from the wall that you might have kicked? Do you have to do something to think "Arghhh, my toe hurts!"? Is the thought "my toe hurts" really true or is there simply a certain sensation that is there but really doesn't belong to an "I/self"? Can a thought - "I/me" - own a sensation? Can a thought be in pain? Or can it only label a sensation in a certain way and then refer to an illusory entity that owns this sensation (which again can only be found as another thought)..?

Sit down and put your hand on the desk in front of you. There is a certain pressure, a tingling... What tells you this is your hand on a desk? The tingling or the pressure or thought about it? When this pressure is experienced, is it the hand or the desk that you feel or both or none?
What says that this tingling is felt by a "you" and is not just a sensation belonging to no one... Is there anything wrong with the sensation simply being there and not being owned by a self? When you hear a sound, does it really require a self to be heard? What does your direct experience reveal?

When you sit next to someone, the person next to you does not experience "my foot" the way you do, but neither does he experience anything else the way you do, right? Does this proof that there is a separate "experiencer" or simply that every experience is unique?

I'd say every experience is unique, but the "unique experiencer" comes from recognising a consistency of experience through time. I don't know who recognises that consistency or how time itself is recognised, but if there were no memories to store the previous experiences and no thought to draw the connecting line between the memories then there could be no separate experiencer.

When you look at something, e.g. a cup on the desk, how far can you deconstruct this experience before you are at a lack of more concepts to describe it? What is the most basic ingredient of "seeing" that you can still put a label on?

I guess noticing patterns and giving things names (and the strong survival value it has) gives the illusion that the things we define are then understood by a separate one that defines them. Using words, I quickly run into a wall when attempting to go beyond describing the cup using the thought labels (i.e it's colour, texture, shape, weight, size, functionality, similarity to other cups etc.)

Do you have to do something to think "Arghhh, my toe hurts!"? Is the thought "my toe hurts" really true or is there simply a certain sensation that is there but really doesn't belong to an "I/self"? Can a thought - "I/me" - own a sensation? Can a thought be in pain?

I don't have to do anything to experience the pain or think about the experience, but to the illusory "I", the illusory suffering seems very real.

When I was much younger I had this thought about not wanting salvation because then that clears God of having some explaining to do. Back then I thought that so what if suffering is caused by an "I" - why did God have to create an existence with a possibility of an "I" to begin with? An existence where (as I cynically coined at the time) "God favours the lucky". I've (hopefully) matured since then and realise of course that any concept an "I" might have of God is by definition misguided and incorrect, but it's just interesting that a more subtle version of this thought surfaced today while thinking about the possibility of eliminating the "I" - the concern that somehow a recognition that suffering is not real might make me care less about the "sufferers", but from what I know of biographies of liberated individuals, it seems that the opposite is true.

Anyway, ignoring this emotional/philosophical hangup, where I get into trouble is detaching the sensation from an (imagined?) experience of suffering, but perhaps that can be achieved by looking more at what you suggested next:

Sit down and put your hand on the desk in front of you. There is a certain pressure, a tingling... What tells you this is your hand on a desk?

That was a good exercise. For a brief moment, there was no hand and no desk (or in my case, keyboard), only an experience belonging to no one. The "I" then quickly returned like some chaperone intervening before the young couple that he's supposed to supervise get too close, God forbid...

Another thing that I've realised is that any insight that I have does not come from me, but is noticed after moments in which I'm not. I'd even say it is insightful only to the degree it isn't mine. Now, the question is just how to stop the "me" for longer periods to be perpetually insightful... :-)

That was a good exercise. For a brief moment, there was no hand and no desk (or in my case, keyboard), only an experience belonging to no one. The "I" then quickly returned like some chaperone intervening before the young couple that he's supposed to supervise get too close, God forbid...

Yes, an experience belonging to no one...
When the "I" returned, how was that experienced? Was it any more than a shift of attention away from the physical sensation to thought? A thought that comes up with "I am feeling this!". What if the thought would not have shown up? Would it still be "your" experience or just experiencing happening?

Can "you" prevent these thoughts showing up? Can you prevent any kind of thoughts showing up?
Can thought control more thought?

If not... what can be done?
The funny thing is that thought seems to be able to observe or witness other thoughts... You can look at thought from a different angle and see that they are only thoughts... When you look at thought, being consciously aware that you are doing just that, what happens? Don't try to avoid or block any thoughts, just let them arise and fall away and watch... Let me know how this is experienced.

Another thing that I've realised is that any insight that I have does not come from me, but is noticed after moments in which I'm not. I'd even say it is insightful only to the degree it isn't mine. Now, the question is just how to stop the "me" for longer periods to be perpetually insightful... :-)

Yes, insight, which is just thought trying to make sense of experience, always happens after the moment has passed... How to stop "me"..? To stop this separate self you first have to know what this "me/I/self" is, right? So... what is it?

Hi Alex,

Is there a certain recommended quota of time per day that is suggested to meditate on the questions or certain things I should remind myself during the working day in order to make better progress? I keep thinking this liberation business could take quite a while for me (if ever) and I'd like to make sure in whatever period that will be allocated for this correspondence, that at least I'll be doing my best in return for your generosity and patience.

Even as I write this I'm thinking that if things are just happening, how can "I" decide to do better? These paradoxes are really messing with me...

When the "I" returned, how was that experienced? Was it any more than a shift of attention away from the physical sensation to thought? A thought that comes up with "I am feeling this!". What if the thought would not have shown up? Would it still be "your" experience or just experiencing happening?

Yes, it was a shift of attention. I assume this attention too isn't "mine" just like nothing else is. Quite a bit of confusion going on. Trying to look at the confusion itself as another thing which is just happening and nothing personal. I wonder if I'll succeed observing this in a detached manner if and when the volume increases and/or confusion would be replaced by fear of losing control. It just occurred to me this worry is also a thought construct of some possible future (though that doesn't mean it doesn't represent a real probability of occurrence - yet another thought, Arrrgh :-)

Can "you" prevent these thoughts showing up? Can you prevent any kind of thoughts showing up?
Can thought control more thought?

Not any more than I can control dreams from showing up, but when dreams do show up, I (mostly) don't know that I'm dreaming. I'd say the same goes with thoughts. Thought can't control more thought. So it's basically it's just the "I" thought happening with other thoughts, controlled by no one and belonging to no one. So why can I easily get and accept this on a logical level yet not "see" it clearly?

To stop this separate self you first have to know what this "me/I/self" is, right? So... what is it?

Still looking, still confused (and knowing the right answer in advance doesn't help). Waiting for a small miracle... :-)

Amnon

Thought can't control more thought. So it's basically it's just the "I" thought happening with other thoughts, controlled by no one and belonging to no one. So why can I easily get and accept this on a logical level yet not "see" it clearly?

Maybe because you expect something extraordinary to happen? What would have to happen so you "see"? And who would be the one that sees?

Maybe all that is in the way of "seeing" is the expectation that you have how "seeing" should be like?
You have an answer already formulated to your question and you wait for the miracle to happen that exactly this answer will arise - you are right, this would really be a miracle! Especially as it is a miracle existing only as a thought story, isn't it?

What if no miracle has to happen at all, you simply have to stop expecting one?
Do you see that these expectations are just wishful thinking? Its the hope that keeps them alive... can you be hope-less? If there is no hope for this miracle to ever happen, what then?

You see, hear, smell, sense, think... what miracle has to happen to change that? Does it need changing? Or does it only need to be seen that all that seems to be wrong with how things are is just another thought about it, but not IT..?

Is there a certain recommended quota of time per day that is suggested to meditate on the questions or certain things I should remind myself during the working day in order to make better progress?

All the time :-)
You can not remind yourself about this, but what can be done is simply trying to remain in the watchful position of the silent witness that observes how thoughts arise and vanish. That is not touched by them, that only notices them and lets them pass. Sure, in the beginning you will get lost in thought a lot, but when conscious awareness returns simply hold on to it... it might seem like an effort at first, but this will soon be normal and the more things are observed the more obvious it will be that thought is just a story-monger - beliefs will crumble and presence will shine...

Stop thinking about stuff like seeing or no-self so much and simply look, observe, witness! There is no answer in a logical thought that is not already prefabricated! Its Does this experience need an answer? What would be the question?

I am travelling for the next 4 days, so maybe you can try practicing that for a few days and then report back how it worked out?

Do you see that these expectations are just wishful thinking? Its the hope that keeps them alive... can you be hope-less?

I understand It's all symptoms of the same thing - hoping that something will happen to change what is and running away from suffering (or pursuing pleasure). It's an impossible situation: If I don't attempt to "get it" then I won't get it and if I do attempt to then the very attempt and hope will perpetuate the "I". Something has eventually got to give...

I am travelling for the next 4 days, so maybe you can try practicing that for a few days and then report back how it worked out?

I'll be away for a few days too (vacation) so that will give me more time to contemplate (or perhaps un-contemplate) all the expectations and hopes.

Hi Amnon,

Hope you are having a nice vacation.
I am back so please post anytime its convenient.

Alex

Hi Alex,

Thank you - just returned today. Not much to report as far as realisations go; guess a few months in the far East would have probably been more spiritually fruitful than a few days in Europe, but I take what comes my way :-)

I'm a bit at a loss as to where to from here. I feel there's something I should be doing, because not actively doing anything (other than my usual unenlightened "chop wood carry water") is just pulling me back to the same old identifications. Perhaps I'm not ready yet and should just accept whatever plays out, and if it doesn't involve "getting it" then so be it - at least for now. It just seems so unachievable (even when knowing this statement is just another thought...)

Whatever your recommendation might be, my sincere thanks for your patience this far.

Amnon

Hi Amnon,

I feel there's something I should be doing, because not actively doing anything (other than my usual unenlightened "chop wood carry water") is just pulling me back to the same old identifications.

Dont worry too much about that, do what comes natural but be fully aware of it.

When you are pulled back into "old identifications", how does that happen? How is that experienced?
Is this just another way of saying "When I am not actively watching, I am getting lost in thought"? or is this a different process?

Also, I didn't say that you shouldn't be doing anything, but rather try to remain consciously aware as much as possible and observe thought throughout the day. When "identification" seems to happen, what is really happening? When anger, frustration, sadness or fear seem to happen, what is really happening? Are they happening to "you" or are they simply thoughts that arise about some imaginary situation that an imaginary you is in?

Can you think of a situation that happens more or less regularly that always brings up the same feelings that lead to identification with an I/self that is suffering this situation? When it happens again, be watchful and look at it "from the outside" - try not to get swept away by the flood of thoughts and honestly look at what is happening.
Can you find an example and report back?

Alex

When you are pulled back into "old identifications", how does that happen? How is that experienced?
Is this just another way of saying "When I am not actively watching, I am getting lost in thought"? or is this a different process?

Yes, I think you described it accurately. My perspective is that it is a bit analogous to being in a "regular" dream (vs. a lucid dream). I get sucked into the daily pressure of getting things done, temporarily forget about liberation and fall back from an awareness of at least "knowing that I don't know" to one in which I don't even know that I don't know...

Also, I didn't say that you shouldn't be doing anything, but rather try to remain consciously aware as much as possible and observe thought throughout the day.

Ok, that makes a lot of sense. So I guess it's a question of managing to do this while in a routine of pressure and deadlines (as you suggested by being reminded when certain thoughts/emotions pop up).

I've always felt that if I would know for sure that a few of years of concentrated effort would definitely bring about the realisation and freedom I'm seeking then I would just drop everything and focus on nothing else but that. Maybe it's the thought that there's a good chance I'd just be trading one "comfortable" illusion for a less comfortable one has kept me from doing this, or maybe (I'd say probably) the way it turned out has nothing to do with my thoughts about it as they themselves are a part of what is turning out...

Can you think of a situation that happens more or less regularly that always brings up the same feelings that lead to identification with an I/self that is suffering this situation? When it happens again, be watchful and look at it "from the outside" - try not to get swept away by the flood of thoughts and honestly look at what is happening.

Thanks, I'll try and concentrate on this throughout the day and report what is happening

I get sucked into the daily pressure of getting things done, temporarily forget about liberation and fall back from an awareness of at least "knowing that I don't know" to one in which I don't even know that I don't know...

Yes, well said :-)
This is something that also happens to most people that "made it through the gate". It is one thing to realise that this I/self is only a story based on more and more thought, but a very different thing to fully live this realisation in every moment of your life... This will take time and all that can be done is to simply stay alert - but at least once it has been seen that this I/self is really only a construct, it will not be forgotten.

I've always felt that if I would know for sure that a few of years of concentrated effort would definitely bring about the realisation and freedom I'm seeking then I would just drop everything and focus on nothing else but that.

That would be too easy ;-)
Sure, you are right, a focussed effort in a serene environment (a monastery?) is beneficial, and applying this practice in daily, western life is much harder, but if you can only be in a special state when you are sitting in your lonely cave, what is it good for? Maybe you can reserve a bit of time each day to practice alone but then try to carry this mindfulness out into the world... you will see, its not has hard as it seems to be, just don't beat yourself up too much about getting lost in thought - it will get less and less...

So... if I would be asking you to explain what this separate I/self is, what would you say? Where does it come from and how does it work? Does it make decisions? Is it the one owning this body and mind?

but if you can only be in a special state when you are sitting in your lonely cave, what is it good for?

The assumption is that at a certain point when realisation occurs, one can leave the cave and go back to the world without having to return to the cave anymore. Anyway, as this isn't something that is about to happen, I'll stop the hypothetical daydreaming...

but at least once it has been seen that this I/self is really only a construct, it will not be forgotten.

I can imagine a situation where I'll forget what I've learned. I assume that is because I haven't yet seen :-)

So... if I would be asking you to explain what this separate I/self is, what would you say? Where does it come from and how does it work? Does it make decisions? Is it the one owning this body and mind?

What I can say is still just from a combination of logical conclusions and insights gathered over time, rather than some "explosive insight of absolute knowing", but this is my understanding so far: The sense of a personal "I" is a fictitious sense of a separate being that feels more and more real as the sustaining pattern (organism or perhaps other) that enables it becomes more complex in it's ability to act. At some point, thoughts that have survival value for the organism are taken too seriously and believed to be a personal reality, when in fact there exists no personal reality, but only reality. Once the illusion of a personal reality is in place then endless more illusions/stories can be built on top of it, including that this fictitious being somehow has a mind, owns it's body, and generally runs the show when in fact there is no one there to own anything - just things happening to no one and no thing, who is at the same time everyone and everything.

That's the scope of my intuitive understanding of how stuff works. The problem with it is that it is still "my" truth and not the truth. When the "my" will be dropped, that would be an achievement, though it wouldn't be my achievement anymore :-)

I can imagine a situation where I'll forget what I've learned. I assume that is because I haven't yet seen :-)

When you forget something how does that work?
You learned that Santa is not real and whenever you see one you now know "Ah... he is just a man is disguise".
You don't have to remember that all the time, you remember only when its necessary... do you see any parallels?

What I can say is still just from a combination of logical conclusions and insights gathered over time, rather than some "explosive insight of absolute knowing"

Tell me, what do you know "absolutely"? Can you know anything absolutely or is logical knowing always based on relative knowledge? Are you waiting for absolute knowledge to appear? If so, first have a look if something like that exists at all... or maybe it is just a "trick of the mind" to ask for a proof that can not be found..?
Does life require knowledge to happen?

Maybe your waiting for this explosion to happen is what keeps you from seeing that you see?
What would change if this "explosive insight of absolute knowing" happens right now... what is different from this moment on? Do you think you will never get lost in thought anymore? Do you think that the person, the conceptual entity will be wiped out completely? Or is it simply good enough to know that it is just a story character, nothing more but also nothing less?

Yes, some people might have some quite intense experiences of the temporary dropping away of self-related thought, but this is nearly always a temporary thing and the self related thinking returns, just like other thoughts return. This process is not aiming at fabricating such a mystic experience, but simply pointing to the obvious fact that there is no separation anywhere to be found outside of thought stating that there should be one...

When you sit down and look, hear, taste, feel... where are the borders between experiences? where are the borders between an experiencer and the experience? what is there? Life, presence, being, awareness... are the separate things? What do you find when you look and neglect logical thought about IT?

Tell me, what do you know "absolutely"? Can you know anything absolutely or is logical knowing always based on relative knowledge?

It appears that (as usual in an attempt to understand the absolute), the answer is paradoxical. The only thing I can know absolutely is that there is nothing I can know absolutely, and the only way for me to see this clearly is to erase the one that wants to know. On and on the thoughts go, pretending to understand while protecting the mansion of nothing...

Does life require knowledge to happen?

Obviously not. But the "I" notices the patterns and wonders about them. Why do they exist? What funcdemental law governs them? Why does that law exist? Does it exist before there's an "I" to notice it? All these questions stem from a questioning "I" and probably fall away when there's no "I" anymore.

You don't have to remember that all the time, you remember only when its necessary... do you see any parallels?

Well, I'm not sure... if by that you mean that it's enough to remember only when the illusion of suffering presents itself and not all the time then it would also follow that one would remember it also when the illusion of enjoying oneself occurs. My understanding of realisation is that somehow there's a continuous recognition of no one by no one. Of course, there's no way for me to grasp the words that I'm writing now since there is stll a sense of someone writing them. There's also the possibility that I'm just talking nonsense... :-)
What I was referring to however in "forgetting" was that perhaps somehow an "I" can be rebuillt after liberation, in the same sense that an "I" was created at childhood. This does not mean that someone becomes "unliberated", but just that someone forgets that they are always liberated.

Maybe your waiting for this explosion to happen is what keeps you from seeing that you see?

I can understand how this waiting is keeping me from seeing that I see, especially as it suggests there's someone that should see it.

What would change if this "explosive insight of absolute knowing" happens right now... what is different from this moment on? Do you think you will never get lost in thought anymore?

The main thing I expect is an end to the search, some deep acceptance and peace with things as they are, which does not imply being indefferent or useless, but rather totally involved, active and compassionate, yet somehow not psycologically attached to the story. I don't expect an end to pain, stress, thoughts etc. but I do expect an end to suffering. I doubt a change like that could somehow occur unnoticed.

When you sit down and look, hear, taste, feel... where are the borders between experiences?

Not sure if you're referring to the border between experiences in time or the border between experience of the different senses. Either way, my knoeledge of what the answer "should be" keeps getting in the way of simply noticing what is, so perhaps it's best I take some more time to look deeper into this rather than give a knee jerk-reply of some pre-constructed story.

What do you find when you look and neglect logical thought about IT

I'm very well versed in logical thought and a complete moron at seeing what it owes it's existance to (and then has the audacity to claim it owns it's creator...). I'm going to set aside more time to practice neglecting thought so that I can better answer that.

But the "I" notices the patterns and wonders about them. Why do they exist? What funcdemental law governs them? Why does that law exist? Does it exist before there's an "I" to notice it? All these questions stem from a questioning "I" and probably fall away when there's no "I" anymore.

That sounds logical if there would be an "I" to do all these things... an "I" existing would also be a prerequisite for succeeding in the task of removing it so as to reach a "not I" state, right..?
But... what if there is no separate "I" at all that does any of this and thus it also can not be removed as it doesn't exist in the first place?

When the "I" notices patters... how does that work?
Sit down and look at your desk or the wall on the other side of the room. There are colours and certain patterns, right. Thought might say "A mirror and a painting!". All good so far. Simple. Now thought says "I see an old photo which I really like!". A certain sensation has come up, maybe a warm feeling in your abdomen and the experience is somehow linked to a sensation and thought states "I like XYZ"...
Now... look again at all these stages of experiencing, recognition and meaning making. Do any of these require a separate self/I to happen? Or is this I/self simply an imaginary entity that is referred to in thought...?
Does this "I" notice anything or is there simply seeing happening, a thought happening stating one or the other and more thought stating that "I am seeing..."... Take you time and note what you find.

Well, I'm not sure... if by that you mean that it's enough to remember only when the illusion of suffering presents itself and not all the time then it would also follow that one would remember it also when the illusion of enjoying oneself occurs.

Who is the one that remembers? Is there such a controlling entity that can remember something at will?

Lets say you learn riding a bike. At first you always fall over, then you slowly keep your balance but this still requires a lot of effort, but soon you don't have to think about keeping balance anymore, it is perfectly integrated into your system. Most of the time you don't ride a bike, but when you do the knowledge is there. Do you have to keep on thinking about how to ride a bike even when you don't ride one so you don't forget?

Look, there is nothing wrong with life, this moment, therefore you also don't have to constantly keep the thought in your head that there is no separate self at all. Life would become very restricted if you would always have to remind yourself that it is not dual, not separate, not experienced by an I etc etc... most of the time the question does not even come up, you simply live life. But sometimes self referential thought leads to certain friction, you don't like whats happening, you expect better etc, then the knowledge will automatically pop up "Yes... thats funny... nice story.." - and it will defuse itself. This will get faster over time, this system will adapt to heal itself...

I don't expect an end to pain, stress, thoughts etc. but I do expect an end to suffering. I doubt a change like that could somehow occur unnoticed.

Sure, physical pain can not be avoided - it happens or not, but suffering is optional. A change like that might even occur unnoticed if it unfolds slowly over time. You simply suffer less and less and somewhen you simply don't remember when you had these kind of sad feelings the last time... they fade just like the deep involvement in I-stories fades. It can become a difficult thing to even vaguely remember how things were when this I was still "in charge"...