The Gate

such as decision, intention, inference, questioning, doubt, emotional reactions and desire belong to a separate entity/consciousness. Are they solely imagination plus tension?

Ok, all of these things create the "experience" of a separate consciousness. Lets look at another way our systems create a false outcome:

Exercise:
Look at the image in this link. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White#/me ... ese%2B.svg

What does the color white look like to us? We experience it as an absence of color.

Look at the image again. The science, and this image, tells us that white is actually the result of overlapping colors. So white is not an absence, its a relection that is full of color - it stimulates ALL of the cones in the eye to give the experience of a white - which looks like an absence. This "trick" is an error we all make.

Look at the image for a third time.

Question1: Intellectually knowing that white is a fullness of color, does it change the "experience" of white being an absence of color to your eyes?


Question2: Intellectually knowing that the self is an overlap of thought, decision, intention, inference, etc, does it change the "experience" of a separate consciousness that is doing the experience?

Question1: Intellectually knowing that white is a fullness of color, does it change the "experience" of white being an absence of color to your eyes?

No.

Question2: Intellectually knowing that the self is an overlap of thought, decision, intention, inference, etc, does it change the "experience" of a separate consciousness that is doing the experience?

No.

Question2: Intellectually knowing that the self is an overlap of thought, decision, intention, inference, etc, does it change the "experience" of a separate consciousness that is doing the experience?

No.

Question: What do you make of all this?

Question2: Intellectually knowing that the self is an overlap of thought, decision, intention, inference, etc, does it change the "experience" of a separate consciousness that is doing the experience?

No.

Question: What do you make of all this?

Intellectually knowing about experience does not change the experience, because intellectually knowing about experience is just another "experience" of intellectually knowing about experience. Intellectualizing has no inherent power to change the experience if it is just another kind of experience.

So, from this, what I can make of it is that I do not need to analyze, intellectualize or try to reach some kind of conclusion about self from the "experience" or "feeling" of there being a separate consciousness/self. It is also fruitless to try to change the experience of there being a separate consciousness, for trying to change would be a separate experience from the experience that it is trying to change.

I do not need to analyze, intellectualize or try to reach some kind of conclusion about self from the "experience" or "feeling" of there being a separate consciousness/self.

Agree

It is also fruitless to try to change the experience of there being a separate consciousness

Agree. There will always arise this experience of "a consciousness" because that is the way the water flows through the pipes.

In your first posts we discussed "true conviction" that there is no self.

Question: Given 1) self cannot be found, 2) the experience of consciousness cannot be unexperienced, and 3) intellect does nothing but move concepts around, how can you reach a place of conviction about this?

Thanks,

In your first posts we discussed "true conviction" that there is no self.

Question: Given 1) self cannot be found, 2) the experience of consciousness cannot be unexperienced, and 3) intellect does nothing but move concepts around, how can you reach a place of conviction about this?

Well, intellectualizing about it is fruitless and trying to change the experience of a feeling that there is a separate consciousness does not work either. So, it seems to come down to seeing clearly that self cannot be found in actuality in any experience even if the experience seems to give an impression of an entity existing. Then, perhaps an absurdity in asserting an existence of something that cannot be found may point to reaching a true conviction that there is indeed no such thing?

Thanks.

come down to seeing clearly that self cannot be found in actuality in any experience even if the experience seems to give an impression of an entity existing.

Agree

perhaps an absurdity in asserting

Still a thought. The shift is experienced. And to reach the point of understanding the impression and unfound nature of self is good progress. Here are examples of a thought (T) and direct experience (DE):

T: I am late for my appointment.
DE: Chair pushing against my backside.
T: The day is beautiful
DE: Sun shines on face

Exercise: Sit and notice your environment. See if you can list out your observations in DE.

Thanks

T: I am late for my appointment.
DE: Chair pushing against my backside.
T: The day is beautiful
DE: Sun shines on face

Exercise: Sit and notice your environment. See if you can list out your observations in DE.

Ok, I did the exercise and came up with a following list of DEs:

Sound of an air conditioner.
Sound of cars passing by.
Urge to move arising.
My neck turning.
Feeling coolness of table surface under my forearm.
My hand picking up a pen and rolling it around.
Noticing pain in the abdomen.
Taking a deep breath.
Heat running through my shoulders.
Feet rubbing against each other.
Hearing a phone ringing.

Sound of an air conditioner.
Sound of cars passing by.
Urge to move arising.
My neck turning.
Feeling coolness of table surface under my forearm.
My hand picking up a pen and rolling it around.
Noticing pain in the abdomen.
Taking a deep breath.
Heat running through my shoulders.
Feet rubbing against each other.
Hearing a phone ringing.

Excellent.

This one:

Urge to move arising.

Question: Where does the urge come from?

Question: Where does the urge come from?

Well, it comes from discomfort, or pain happening at a part of my body.

Ah, now when I observe it again, it is probably not a DE, there is a sensation of discomfort followed by a movement of my body, but no such thing as an urge in DE.

there is a sensation of discomfort followed by a movement of my body

Right. And these sensation - movements do have a pattern, we are not automatons.

Question: Is there an "I" in all of these sensations/reactions?

Right. And these sensation - movements do have a pattern, we are not automatons.

Question: Is there an "I" in all of these sensations/reactions?

No, I cannot find an "I" in any of them. However, I still have a hard time grasping the implication of it. These sensations/reactions seem so much like mine. There is this familiarity to them. However, as we discussed, this familiar feeling is only experience going on and there is nothing about it that inherently requires an "I".

We play this virtual game of "I" in all seriousness though. We make this "I" which does not even exist to be responsible for all of our personality traits, actions, emotions and reactions. In my early life and also into adulthood, I have been hopping between two cultures. Due to this, I never felt really at ease in my own skin, having become very rigid in my action sometimes and like I do not know how to act spontaneously and freely in a situation. I see that this is due to much conflicting and background ideas/assumptions about what this "I" should/should not be doing in a specific situation. This is still going on and sometimes painful, but I think I am learning to take it less and less personally...they are just imagination going on and there is really no "I" that is responsible for our character traits/behaviors/actions. Those around me take these things very personally though, and it makes me confused a little bit sometimes. Anyway, just rambling, please ignore if they are irrelevant.

Thanks.

These sensations/reactions seem so much like mine.

White seems so much like an absence of color. This is how the mechanism works.

In my early life and also into adulthood, I have been hopping between two cultures. Due to this, I never felt really at ease in my own skin, having become very rigid in my action sometimes and like I do not know how to act spontaneously and freely in a situation. I see that this is due to much conflicting and background ideas/assumptions about what this "I" should/should not be doing in a specific situation. This is still going on and sometimes painful, but I think I am learning to take it less and less personally...they are just imagination going on and there is really no "I" that is responsible for our character traits/behaviors/actions.

Exercise: Recalling our T vs DE exercise from before, identify which of these sentences are Direct Experience.

In my early life and also into adulthood, I have been hopping between two cultures. Due to this, I never felt really at ease in my own skin, having become very rigid in my action sometimes and like I do not know how to act spontaneously and freely in a situation. I see that this is due to much conflicting and background ideas/assumptions about what this "I" should/should not be doing in a specific situation. This is still going on and sometimes painful, but I think I am learning to take it less and less personally...they are just imagination going on and there is really no "I" that is responsible for our character traits/behaviors/actions.

Exercise: Recalling our T vs DE exercise from before, identify which of these sentences are Direct Experience.

Ok, right...I would say none of them are DEs. They are all thoughts about "I", thoughts about past/present/future, thoughts about some situation, and discursive thinking.

hey are all thoughts about "I"

Right, good.

Question1: Given these observations, does "I" exist in any form other than as a thought?

Question2: How does the answer to Question1 change your perspective from when you started this discussion?

Thanks