The Gate

Hi Mikael:

Thank you for these observations. The more you do this the easier it is to see what is actually appearing in the moment.

Here is a simple experiment to highlight the difference between actual experience and the 'stories' thought tells about experience.

Look at some object/s in the room.
Hold up the 'hand' so the objects are now covered.

Notice that a thought may say there are objects hidden behind the hand.

Are there actually objects behind the hand?
Do the objects behind the hand appear in actual experience?
If not, are those hidden objects actual experience, or are they just a *story* by definition?
Can anything ever be hidden and unknown?

Sincerely,
Jeremy

Hi Jeremy

Are there actually objects behind the hand?

Mind would say Yes but actual experience only percieves the hand.

Do the objects behind the hand appear in actual experience?

No, they don't.

If not, are those hidden objects actual experience, or are they just a *story* by definition?

Well, like the self, they are the true definition of "story" if they are not in actual exper

Can anything ever be hidden and unknown?

No, otherwise it doesn't exist.

Hi Mikael:

Are there actually objects behind the hand?

Mind would say Yes but actual experience only percieves the hand.

Thoughts layer concepts over actual experience (AE). A thought (concept or label) is never the actual. Some thoughts point to the actual, and some point to other thoughts, but the content of every single thought is just a story.

Do the objects behind the hand appear in actual experience?

No, they don't.

Yes, the only experience relevant to those are the AE of thought. Thought points to color and labels it 'back of my hand'. Color is the AE of color and not the AE of 'back of my hand'.

If not, are those hidden objects actual experience, or are they just a *story* by definition?

Well, like the self, they are the true definition of "story" if they are not in actual exper

Yes, exactly.

Can anything ever be hidden and unknown?

No, otherwise it doesn't exist.

If you are not aware of a ‘thing’ then how can it exist? If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it
make a sound? Is there even a forest or a tree falling? Please expand upon your answer by answering this question.

Which leads us to the nature of thought.

Here is a thought exercise. Sit quietly for about 30 minutes and notice the arising thoughts. Just let them appear as they
appear. Try your best to COMPLETELY ignore what they are saying and just notice how they appear, without you doing
anything at all.

Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear?
Could you have done anything to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead?
Where are they coming from and going to?

Can you predict your next thought?
Can you push away any thought?
Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle?

Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts?
Can you choose not to have painful, negative or fearful thoughts?
Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?
Is it possible to control any thoughts? Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Including the thought 'I'?

It seems that thought has some logical ordered appearance, but look carefully and just notice if there is an organised
sequence? Or is that just another thought that says ‘these thoughts are in sequence’ or “they take content from previous
thought”, or that ‘one thought follows another thought’?

Look carefully when doing this exercise and do it several times if necessary. Please answer each question individually.

Sincerely,
Jeremy

Hi Jeremy

If you are not aware of a ‘thing’ then how can it exist? If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it
make a sound? Is there even a forest or a tree falling? Please expand upon your answer by answering this question.

It can't exist if not in AE. The tree doesn't make a sound, in fact, neither the tree or the forest exist outside of AE.

Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear?

Let me preface this by saying I really enjoyed this one! No, thoughts would just come and go.

Could you have done anything to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead?

Not at all.

Where are they coming from and going to?

That's probably a question for philosophers, personally I don't know.

Can you predict your next thought?

No.

Can you push away any thought?

No.

Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle?

Where is the middle? No, I can't.

Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts?

Unfortunately no.

Can you choose not to have painful, negative or fearful thoughts?

No.

Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?

No.

Is it possible to control any thoughts? Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Including the thought 'I'?

No. I wish I could control thoughts and I've tried but it's not possible.

It seems that thought has some logical ordered appearance, but look carefully and just notice if there is an organised
sequence? Or is that just another thought that says ‘these thoughts are in sequence’ or “they take content from previous
thought”, or that ‘one thought follows another thought’?

Interesting. It seems that thoughts have no cohesive structure. Thought builds upon thought but there is no order.

Hi Mikael:

Thanks for the quick response. Excellent observations.

Is it possible to control any thoughts? Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Including the thought 'I'?

No. I wish I could control thoughts and I've tried but it's not possible.

We will talk more about control later.

The following link is a 7 minute clip of a soccer game. If you prefer another sport…please feel free to find one to do this exercise with.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yy5pL-myDzw

1. Watch one minute with the sound turned OFF, watching ‘people’ messing about with a round thing on a field, up and
down, up and down. Let it sink in, the whole experience.

2. Once the first minute is completed, now watch another whole minute with the commentary turned ON.
Notice the differences. Notice how the commentator (aka thought) offers lots of know-how, even advice, seems to feel as
though they can influence somehow what is going on, as though one outcome is much preferred to the opposite outcome,
the commentary may seem to heighten any supporter feelings which are there, and call for an identification with one
team or other, and with the importance of the game itself.

3. Now turn the volume OFF AGAIN and just watch the action with NO audible commentary, the shapes moving around on
the screen etc. Again notice all the differences in what is appearing as experience.

4. Now turn the volume ON again and ignore what you think you know thought is talking about, and just notice it as sound.

Let me know what you notice when you turn the sound on and off, and without thought, what is actually appearing/happening etc?

Is the commentary on the football game a necessity for the play to happen?

And in the same way: Is the inner narration of thought a necessity for the play of life to happen?

Sincerely,
Jeremy

Hi Jeremy

Let me know what you notice when you turn the sound on and off, and without thought, what is actually appearing/happening etc?

OK, with the sound on everything is drawn toward the commentary, it almost seems to take aay from the AE.
With the sound off there is ONLY the AE (ie colour etc).

Is the commentary on the football game a necessity for the play to happen?

Not at all.

And in the same way: Is the inner narration of thought a necessity for the play of life to happen?

No, the inner commentator is never necessary. AE happens much like the game without the sound.

Mikael:

And in the same way: Is the inner narration of thought a necessity for the play of life to happen?

No, the inner commentator is never necessary. AE happens much like the game without the sound.

Exactly.

Let’s have a look at this. Sit quietly, close the eyes, take in a couple of deep breaths to settle the dust and then listen to
the sounds in the room where you are, or sounds from outside. Then when ready just choose one sound and pay attention
to that one sound only.

1) In 'hearing' can anything be found, other than the AE of sound? (‘what can be heard’)?

2) Can what is doing the hearing be found? Or is there only AE sound?

3) Can an 'I', ‘ear’, ‘body’, ‘person’ be found? Or are these statements thoughts about an 'I', ‘ear’, ‘body’, ‘person’?

Look very carefully. Where does ‘hearing’ end and sound begin? Can a dividing line between ‘hearer’ and sound be found?
Or is there just hearer/sound?

Can a 'hearer' ever be found in 'what is being heard' – AE sound?

If that is all, and no INHERENT HEARER is found . . . would anything that is suggested as the hearer be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

Sincerely,
Jeremy

Hi Jeremy

1) In 'hearing' can anything be found, other than the AE of sound? (‘what can be heard’)?

No, just the AE

2) Can what is doing the hearing be found? Or is there only AE sound?

No, no "hearer" just the AE

3) Can an 'I', ‘ear’, ‘body’, ‘person’ be found? Or are these statements thoughts about an 'I', ‘ear’, ‘body’, ‘person’?

It's simply thoughts, there's nothing there that I can put my finger on.

Look very carefully. Where does ‘hearing’ end and sound begin? Can a dividing line between ‘hearer’ and sound be found?
Or is there just hearer/sound?

Well all I can find is sound, no hearer and there is no space between the hearing and sound, it's one thing.

Can a 'hearer' ever be found in 'what is being heard' – AE sound?

No, there is no-one hearing there is only the sound.

If that is all, and no INHERENT HEARER is found . . . would anything that is suggested as the hearer be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?

It's just a thought. What I perceive of as "I" or "me" is just a thought. Amazing1

Hi Mikael,

Nice work LOOKING with the hearing/sound exercise.

Can a 'hearer' ever be found in 'what is being heard' – AE sound?

No, there is no-one hearing there is only the sound.

Yes, AE of sound is all there is.

Can a 'hearer' ever be found in 'what is being heard' – AE sound?

It's simply thoughts, there's nothing there that I can put my finger on.

When you closed the eyes and the thoughts about an 'ear' appeared, did you also notice that a 'mental' image/outline of an 'ear' also appeared? Have a look now. It is not only thoughts that infer an 'ear' it is also those appearing images that infer an 'ear'.

Look very carefully. Where does ‘hearing’ end and sound begin? Can a dividing line between ‘hearer’ and sound be found?
Or is there just hearer/sound?

Well all I can find is sound, no hearer and there is no space between the hearing and sound, it's one thing.

Precisely!

It is important that this is actually seen/realized through LOOKING. Knowing it intellectually doesn't do anything. It is like reading all those books on what this is about. If it was simply intellectual knowledge needed, then we would all be 'awake' by now!

Let's continue on by examining the idea of sight/seeing.

With eyes closed, there is the experience of 'blackness'. There may a bright light, a red glow, sparkly bits or cloudy flecks
appearing and disappearing - It really doesn't matter about the specifics. We are just noticing ‘blackness’.

1) With eyes closed, can you confirm that what is experienced is 'blackness'?
2) Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than 'blackness'?
3) Can what is seeing the blackness be found?
4) Can a pair of eyes, an 'I' / 'me', a person be found that is ‘seeing’ the blackness?

Is there anything that is witnessing the color? Or is there just 'blackness' to be found?
What do you find?

Look very carefully. Where does ‘seeing’ end and color begin? Can a dividing line between ‘seeing’ and color be found?
Or is there just seeing/color?

Can a 'see-er' ever be found in 'what is being seen' – AE color?

If that is all, and no INHERENT SEE-ER found . . . would anything that is suggested as the see-er be anything other than a
concept/idea/thought?

Okay….then open the eyes and look around.

Is there a difference between the ‘blackness’ when eyes are closed and ‘color’ when eyes are open or are they both
simply the appearance of color?

Is there anything that is witnessing color?

Sincerely,
Jeremy

Hi Jeremy

1) With eyes closed, can you confirm that what is experienced is 'blackness'?

Well, it's not even blackness per se, it's just colour, the AE of colour.

2) Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than 'blackness'?

No

3) Can what is seeing the blackness be found?

No, there is just the AE

4) Can a pair of eyes, an 'I' / 'me', a person be found that is ‘seeing’ the blackness?

No, nothing.

Is there anything that is witnessing the color? Or is there just 'blackness' to be found?
What do you find?

There's nothing witnessing anything, there's just the AE of colour.

Look very carefully. Where does ‘seeing’ end and color begin? Can a dividing line between ‘seeing’ and color be found?
Or is there just seeing/color?

There is only seeing/colour, there is absolutely no difference between seeing and colour.

Can a 'see-er' ever be found in 'what is being seen' – AE color?

No

If that is all, and no INHERENT SEE-ER found . . . would anything that is suggested as the see-er be anything other than a
concept/idea/thought?

It's just a thought/concept. This exercise really drove that home.

Is there a difference between the ‘blackness’ when eyes are closed and ‘color’ when eyes are open or are they both
simply the appearance of color?

No difference. They are both just an appearance.

Is there anything that is witnessing color?

No, nothing at all.

cheers

Mikael

Hi Mikael:

Thank you for your responses. Your answers are accurate, but it is important to remember that the purpose is to spend time LOOKING at each phase in the process. When we rapidly respond to posts with very short answers, it is a red flag that we may be relying too much on the illusion of memory or answering from what we believe we already know (perhaps without even being aware of it). Your answers to the last series of inquiry are devoid of feeling and were presented very quickly after they were posted. This is something to be mindful of as the illusion of self can be very powerful as we move through this process.

LOOKING needs to take place with each question and it is key to not rely on memory at any stage, as it is LOOKING and only LOOKING at AE that brings about true realization.

Do you understand this?

If necessary, review the past exercises and do them again and feel free to post your response in light of these comments. When you are ready to proceed, we shall move on!

Sincerely,
Jeremy

Hi Jeremy

Do you understand this?

Yes, I understand and I apologize if yo felt that I wasn't putting effort into my answers. I won't make excuses but I honestly felt that I was answering after looking.

I suppose I get impatient with my "self" and want to see change happen more quickly and I have been noticing changes in my overall perception when it comes to everyday life and AE.

Anyway, I hope you understand and I would very much like to carry on.

Thanks

Mikael

Hi Mikael:

Please close your eyes for this exercise, just notice any ‘mental’ images or thoughts that appear and put them aside.
Place a hand on a desk or table (flat surface) - Close your eyes.

Now 'go to' the sensation which we would normally refer to as 'hand on desk' and answer from what you can FIND.

1) How many things do you find? Are there two things (hand and desk) or is there one thing – AE of sensation.
2) Do you notice 'one thing feeling another thing'? Or is there just 'a sensation'?
3) Do you find an 'I', a body, a hand 'feeling' . . . or is there just 'a sensation'?

Look very carefully. Where does ‘feeling’ end and sensation begin? Can a dividing line between ‘feeling’ and sensation be
found? Or is there just sensation?

Can a ‘feeler’ ever be found in 'what is being felt' – AE sensation?

If that is all, and no INHERENT FEELER is found . . . would anything that is suggested as the feeler be other than a concept/idea/thought?

You can do this with taste and smell as well. Make a coffee and ask the above questions referencing smell, and then take a sip of coffee and reference the questions to taste.

Sincerely,
Jeremy

Hi Jeremy

1) How many things do you find? Are there two things (hand and desk) or is there one thing – AE of sensation.

I did this experiment for about 20 minutes, at first I could feel my hand on the table but when I started to LOOK It became the AE of sensation. What is interesting though, is the longer I did it the less I could identify anything like "hand", "table".

2) Do you notice 'one thing feeling another thing'? Or is there just 'a sensation'?

There is just sensation. It's almost disorienting as if my mind wants to fight against it.

3) Do you find an 'I', a body, a hand 'feeling' . . . or is there just 'a sensation'?

No, no "I", no hand, nothing I could identify as belonging to "me".

Look very carefully. Where does ‘feeling’ end and sensation begin? Can a dividing line between ‘feeling’ and sensation be
found? Or is there just sensation?

I could not find a dividing line. There was the sensation and my attention became very sharp and clear. Is that normal?

Hi Mikael:

Thank you for these responses.

Look very carefully. Where does ‘feeling’ end and sensation begin? Can a dividing line between ‘feeling’ and sensation be
found? Or is there just sensation?

I could not find a dividing line. There was the sensation and my attention became very sharp and clear. Is that normal?

We will explore AE of sensation more as we continue on, but first let us look at the nature of thought.

Here is a thought exercise. Sit quietly for about 30 minutes and notice the arising thoughts. Just let them appear as they
appear. Try your best to COMPLETELY ignore what they are saying and just notice how they appear, without you doing
anything at all.

Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear?
Could you have done anything to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead?
Where are they coming from and going to?

Can you predict your next thought?
Can you push away any thought?
Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle?

Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts?
Can you choose not to have painful, negative or fearful thoughts?
Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?
Is it possible to control any thoughts? Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Including the thought 'I'?

It seems that thought has some logical ordered appearance, but look carefully and just notice if there is an organised
sequence? Or is that just another thought that says ‘these thoughts are in sequence’ or “they take content from previous
thought”, or that ‘one thought follows another thought’?

Look carefully when doing this exercise and do it several times if necessary. Please answer each question individually.

Sincerely,
Jeremy