The Gate

And, I notice that when not looking, there's a presumption operating that there is a decider or thinker. It feels like "I" am looking, "I" am writing this.

So, thoughts are just happening randomly all the time?

What is this sense of there being a thinker and decider?

Now, each time I type "I" or "my" the question is coming up who/what is that referring to? What's noticing all of this?

How is it FELT exactly that “I am looking”, “I am writing”?
Please describe me this FEELING as precisely as you can.

So, is there any thought that is not random and not on autopilot (happening by itself without anything doing it)?

Please describe me this SENSE of being a thinker and decider. How is this SENSED? How is this FELT?
Can a thinker be FELT?
Can a decider be FELT?

What if you stop for a moment, and ACTIVELY search through the whole body from head to toe for an I/me that is noticing. Pay particular attention to the head and the chest.
So WHERE is this I, the noticer?

Hence this “I” is not a thing that’s deciding, rather it’s a hologram and instead of there being a real “I”, there is actually an organism that’s acting according to its unique programming and conditioning, simply interacting with life and unfolding.

No, neither a thinker or decider, as a thing, can be felt, only sensations (physical and emotional), thoughts, and images which have been presumed to be a thinker or decider but upon examination there isn’t a decider. There’s a thought that “I” am deciding, that corresponds to the sensations in the throat and chest area and supported by memories, images and other thoughts, which creates a “me” that thinks it’s deciding. How odd.

When it’s remembered, or seen, that what is believed to be the “I” is this set of sensations and images and memories, etc., then what seems to be noticing is not an “I” but just a quality of noticing. Not a thing but something that notices.

Hi Brett,

Hence this “I” is not a thing that’s deciding, rather it’s a hologram and instead of there being a real “I”, there is actually an organism that’s acting according to its unique programming and conditioning, simply interacting with life and unfolding.

Is this clearly seen experientially, or is it rather an intellectual understanding?

I'm not sure. The part you are quoting is more of an interpretation of the raw experience – for example, I used the word hologram as a way of describing what was being seen and experienced through the investigation. No thing can be found, and then when I look at what was taken to be a thing, all that's found is a series of behaviors. Then looking into what drives those, it seems like programming (like DNA-level programming, desire for survival, love, etc.) - and conditioning such as early experiences, social experiences. Is that intellectual or experiential?

No, neither a thinker or decider, as a thing, can be felt, only sensations (physical and emotional), thoughts, and images which have been presumed to be a thinker or decider but upon examination there isn’t a decider. There’s a thought that “I” am deciding, that corresponds to the sensations in the throat and chest area and supported by memories, images and other thoughts, which creates a “me” that thinks it’s deciding. How odd.

So is it clearly seen experientially that there is no thinker or decider?

I believe so. It seems to happen the way I’ve described.

How does it FEEL to see that there is no thinker or decider?

It just seems odd. And an experience that is, so far, difficult to stay with. In the moment it seems to bring up questioning about what is all of this. But then it seems to flicker in and out of a sense of noticing. In other words it forgets and re-supposes an “I”. I would say, at this moment, just that it’s difficult to stay with. How can one stay with this? In trying to put words to something that’s happening, it is as if the seeing invokes a reprogramming that is trying to happen but then it short circuits.

When it’s remembered, or seen, that what is believed to be the “I” is this set of sensations and images and memories, etc., then what seems to be noticing is not an “I” but just a quality of noticing. Not a thing but something that notices.

“Not a thing but something that is notices” – WHERE is this something? – find its exact location

I can’t find a location. It is difficult to describe. Not a thing, not somewhere. More like everywhere and noplace.

And WHAT is this something that notices?

I just don’t know.

Vivien

I'm not sure. The part you are quoting is more of an interpretation of the raw experience – for example, I used the word hologram as a way of describing what was being seen and experienced through the investigation. No thing can be found, and then when I look at what was taken to be a thing, all that's found is a series of behaviors. Then looking into what drives those, it seems like programming (like DNA-level programming, desire for survival, love, etc.) - and conditioning such as early experiences, social experiences. Is that intellectual or experiential?

I would say, at this moment, just that it’s difficult to stay with.

How can one stay with this?

V: “Not a thing but something that is notices” – WHERE is this something? – find its exact location

B: I can’t find a location. It is difficult to describe. Not a thing, not somewhere. More like everywhere and noplace.

V: And WHAT is this something that notices?

B: I just don’t know.

There might be some experiential seeing, but then you try to figure this out intellectually

Is seeing that there is no decider is a state or a different experience than what is normally happening?
Or it’s a recognition of no-decider regardless of any state/experience? Which one?

WHERE is Brett, who is struggling to stay with it?
WHAT is it that wants to stay with it? Where is the wanter/Brett?

If you cannot find this ‘something’ and you actually don’t know anything about it, then HOW do you know that there is ‘something that notices’ at all? How? Just because thoughts suggest so?

I don't know what the noticing is. I don't know how to describe it. What's investigating, what's looking? It's not a thing but ... what is looking for Brett, or a decider? How do I know there is something that notices?

Is there a noticer or witness outside of what is happening, looking at it?

Is there an experiencer + the experienced?

To see this, listen to the sounds, is there a hearer here and sound there? Or there is only the sound?

In touching, is there a feeler of touch and the sensation of touch? Or there is only one sensation?

So is it clearly SEEN that there is no experiencer, no hearer, and feeler (and not just intellectually)?
Is there any doubt?

Now ...
Could you try pointing at yourself now?
Please do it.
What do you point at?

Yes, it is clear that there is no experiencer, hearer or feeler. None of these are found. There’s no doubt.

V: Could you try pointing at yourself now?
Please do it.
What do you point at?

B: Thoughts. Images. Sensations. Sounds.

And how does it FEEL to see this?

Are you saying that when you are pointing at yourself you are pointing at to thoughts, images, sensations, sounds?
Yourself = thoughts, images, sensations, sounds ?

WHERE is the me/self? Where is its exact physical location?

Please tell me a bit about how you perceive things in your everyday life. Is there a me showing up as the thinker, doer, chooser, decider?

Yes, the perception of a me as a thinker, decider, etc. does occur and that can last until looking/seeing happens again.

What is it exactly that is choosing which hand to raise?

Can you find a self/me or anything that is doing the choosing?

Is there a me/I controlling and moving the hand?

WHERE is the controller/me?

How is the decision made?

Is there a decision maker/me?

I'm stumped.

Vivien, what does this all mean?