The Gate

Dear Kay,

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

What is experienced is colour. There may be a lot less of it than when the eyes are open , but nonetheless it is another experience of colour. Blackness is a label in thought. In this same way thought may apply the label 'nothingness', 'emptiness' or 'void'.

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

With the eyes closed only blackness is seen. The experience of this colour or image.

3) Can what is seeing the blackness be found?

The experience of seeing the blackness is clear. There is no see-er separate from the blackness. There is blackness. There is nothing separate from the blackness that is doing the seeing.

4) Can a pair of eyes, an 'I' / 'me', a person be found that is ‘seeing’ the blackness? Or is there just 'blackness' to be found?
What do you find?

There is blackness. There are no eyes, no I or self or person to be found seeing the blackness.

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

I was mistaken to think that when the eyes are closed that seeing is paused. Colours experienced when the eyes are open are the same as colour with eyes closed. There may be more colours with the eyes open but at all times there is no I or self or person to be found seeing, only colour being experienced.

I have yet to answer your questions about thought, or do the next exercise. This will be done in the next few hours.

Love, Iain

Hey Iain,

Nice looking with the colour exercise. I will wait until you have answered all the questions before I respond.

Love, Kay

Dear Kay,

Really have a careful look a thought. Does thought have a voice? Does thought have sound? Does thought have an image? Does thought have a sensation? Does thought have a taste? Does thought have a smell? Can you describe a thought?

Thoughts happen with their narration but they have no voice. That would mean there is a source of thoughts that can speak them out. If thoughts had a sound then it could be experienced. Likewise thoughts do not have sensations, tastes or smells.

Attempts to describe a thought are bound to fail. I look for a way to describe thought and I come up blank. They are like an unending echo chamber of ideas rebounding off each other. They keep pouring out a story but they are unable to know what they are. They can label and comment, but they can't look towards what they are.

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

The 'choice' happens but there is no chooser. The action happens but I cannot see choice or chooser.

Can you find a separate individual or anything that is doing the choosing?

I can't find a source of agency in the colours of the hand or the sensations of movement. Tracing back I find nothing.

What is it that is controlling the hand?

There is nothing. There isn't even a space I can describe.

Can a ‘controller’ of any description be located?

Every lift of the hand confirms there is no controller. There is nowhere to look other than the colour of the hand, the sensation of the table, the cool of the air under the hand.

Can anything be found that makes the hand move?

There is only the image of the movement and the sensations experienced.

How is the decision made?

Tracing back there is nothing to be found before the hand raises. There is no decision maker to be found before the movement takes place.

Love, Iain

Hello Iain,

Really have a careful look a thought. Does thought have a voice? Does thought have sound? Does thought have an image? Does thought have a sensation? Does thought have a taste? Does thought have a smell? Can you describe a thought?

Thoughts happen with their narration but they have no voice. That would mean there is a source of thoughts that can speak them out. If thoughts had a sound then it could be experienced. Likewise thoughts do not have sensations, tastes or smells.

Thoughts appear that ‘tell stories’, and thoughts appearance is not thought but experience itself showing up as thought. Thought is experience and experience is always here! It is just thought that says thought is something other than experience!

Attempts to describe a thought are bound to fail. I look for a way to describe thought and I come up blank. They are like an unending echo chamber of ideas rebounding off each other. They keep pouring out a story but they are unable to know what they are. They can label and comment, but they can't look towards what they are.

It is impossible to describe a thought because experience/This is indescribable. But I liked how a friend ‘described’ thought recently: thoughts are like empty whispers.

So you looked again with the ‘hand raising’ exercise and could not find a decision maker/chooser. So let’s have a look at what is needed for there to be a decision maker.

For a decision to be made that means
1. that there must be a someone or something, and
2. this someone/something is thinking
3. and this someone/something created and specifically chose which thoughts to think in the moment
4. and this someone/something then made a choice based on the decision made via thinking which hand to raise and when to raise it.
5. and through that choice, the thought chosen (eg raise right hand) was the catalyst that made the right hand raise (which is cause and effect = time)
6. and last but not least, that there are hands that can be raised!

Can you find anyone/anything that is doing the above?
Is a thought the catalyst that makes actions happen?
In AE are there hands that can be raised?

Ok, last exercise on control as there was a feeling of doership ie it felt like the ‘self’ is the ‘chooser’ etc.

This exercise has to do with the sense of seeing as well.

Take a few relaxed breaths to let the dust settle for a while, and then:
Look on your right.
Then look on your left.
Finally, bring your head back to centre, close your eyes and look in front.

Okay, so when you look on the right, the view on the right is seen (whatever that is).
When you look on the left, the view on the left is seen (whatever that is).
And then, when you look in front of you with eyes closed, the view in front is seen (ie black space).

So, when the view on the right is seen, do you have the ‘choice’ not to see? I’m not asking can you ‘choose’ to see something else like another view or black space if you close your eyes. The question is, can you turn seeing off? Can you NOT see what is seen?

Same thing with the view on the left, can you NOT see the view on the left?
Same thing with the view in front with closed eyes, can you NOT see the blank sky?
Can you turn off seeing?

What did the 'chooser' choose? Did a 'self' choose something?

If you can't choose what you're aware of, then what else is there to choose?

Now that you have done this exercise, how is the idea of being the controller/chooser/decision maker sitting with you now? Is it any clearer

Love, Kay

Dear Kay,

Every time I follow your directions about what thought is, there is a feeling of being nudged closer to seeing.

I'm delayed in responding to your questions. I will respond fully in 18 - 20 hours.

Love, Iain

Thank you Iain, I really appreciate your thoughtfulness in letting me know that you will be responding later.

Love, Kay

Dear Kay,

Can you find anyone/anything that is doing the above?

Attempts to glimpse a someone or something reveal only a space where such a something or someone is absent. Someones are a thought story and are no more real than any other thought.

Is a thought the catalyst that makes actions happen?

Thoughts are simply themselves. They have no source, beginning or end, and are not ‘created’. There are no moments and no chooser or choice as to what thought happens when. Thoughts cannot trigger actions.

In AE are there hands that can be raised?

In looking there is only colour seen and sensation felt. Hands, the concept of raising or not raising, and the invented chooser are in thought only.

So, when the view on the right is seen, do you have the ‘choice’ not to see? I’m not asking can you ‘choose’ to see something else like another view or black space if you close your eyes. The question is, can you turn seeing off? Can you NOT see what is seen?

There is no choice not to see. There is no chooser who can choose not to experience.

Same thing with the view on the left, can you NOT see the view on the left?

There is no way to pause experience. How could reality possibly be paused? Experience is always here.

Same thing with the view in front with closed eyes, can you NOT see the blank sky?
Can you turn off seeing?

There can be no end to colour or image. Seeing cannot be turned off.

What did the 'chooser' choose? Did a 'self' choose something?

I can only find the experience of seeing. No choice or chooser to see or avoid seeing. There was no chooser involved in the viewing with eyes closed or open. There is experience but no doership or self.

If you can't choose what you're aware of, then what else is there to choose?

There is awareness over which there is no control, and there is the appearance of thought suggesting an ongoing story in which again control is entirely absent. Having looked everywhere, choice is absent.

Now that you have done this exercise, how is the idea of being the controller/chooser/decision maker sitting with you now? Is it any clearer

It’s possible to just sit back knowing that experience will keep experiencing, life will unfold, the game of imagining a controller who can decide can end as it’s contradicted by seeing what is.

Love, Iain

Hi Iain,

You may have already seen this video science and the idea of decision making.

https://vimeo.com/90101368

In AE are there hands that can be raised?

In looking there is only colour seen and sensation felt. Hands, the concept of raising or not raising, and the invented chooser are in thought only.

Yes, so choosing or not choosing is just happening.

Same thing with the view on the left, can you NOT see the view on the left?

There is no way to pause experience. How could reality possibly be paused? Experience is always here.

Yep, no way in pausing experience lol! And there is no choice/control in what appears, how it appears or when it appears.

What did the 'chooser' choose? Did a 'self' choose something?

I can only find the experience of seeing. No choice or chooser to see or avoid seeing. There was no chooser involved in the viewing with eyes closed or open. There is experience but no doership or self.

Lovely, Let’s say that the idea of ‘sadness’ appears. Is there a chooser who chose to become sad? Or is sadness just appearing?

If you can't choose what you're aware of, then what else is there to choose?

There is awareness over which there is no control, and there is the appearance of thought suggesting an ongoing story in which again control is entirely absent. Having looked everywhere, choice is absent.

Lovely, Iain.

Now that you have done this exercise, how is the idea of being the controller/chooser/decision maker sitting with you now? Is it any clearer

It’s possible to just sit back knowing that experience will keep experiencing, life will unfold, the game of imagining a controller who can decide can end as it’s contradicted by seeing what is.

Lovely! And when seeing this, how do you feel, what happens?

How are you travelling with what we have explored so far? What is happening for you?

Love, Kay

Dear Kay,

You may have already seen this video science and the idea of decision making.

I hadn't seen this before. Good old science. It’s a though life is the other way round to how I took it to be. I believed in a separate self or person called Iain who was at the centre of experiencing life and who had some agency in participation in life. In truth it is life that is happening in unceasing flow. I react and respond. A story flows in thought. However that story follows from life, it does not predict, control or decide the life and reactions and responses flowing onwards.

Lovely, Let’s say that the idea of ‘sadness’ appears. Is there a chooser who chose to become sad? Or is sadness just appearing?

Life does not bring me uncomfortable feelings. Life does not want me to be sad. There is a stream of reactions that stretch back forever into something thought labels ‘the past’. Life flows, and I react. Sensations arise and thought labels some as sadness, others as joy. The thought story isn’t going to go away. Thoughts won’t vanish in seeing there is no self. However, there is no need to believe in the thought story anymore.

Sadness only persists and builds when I resist it, when I think “I am sad…oh dear”, and let the story of sadness take over: “Iain is inclined to sadness…Iain needs X, Y or Z or avoid sadness…Iain deserves to be sad because he didn’t receive enough love as a child etc etc”. If I simply look at the sensation and the labeling and be aware of the story but don’t grip or believe it then I can release into the life and reactions flowing towards me. I can see the thoughts as simply commentary, the thought that I either need to or could act to influence emotion as a powerless empty thought, and in doing so that grip naturally is released, and I can sit back and await the next response, sensations and chapter of the story.

Undeniably there are a myriad of labels and thoughts appearing about sadness. Undeniably there is no chooser selecting sadness.

How are you traveling with what we have explored so far? What is happening for you?

The journey is delightful thanks. Your skill in guiding equally so. I feel I am in a roll with things beginning to look and feel clearer. All the thoughts that limited my seeing before are feeling more powerless and empty.

Love, Iain

Hey Iain,

You may have already seen this video science and the idea of decision making.

In truth it is life that is happening in unceasing flow. I react and respond. A story flows in thought. However that story follows from life, it does not predict, control or decide the life and reactions and responses flowing onwards.

What exactly is it that “reacts and responds to the flow of life”?

Lovely, Let’s say that the idea of ‘sadness’ appears. Is there a chooser who chose to become sad? Or is sadness just appearing?

Life does not bring me uncomfortable feelings. Life does not want me to be sad. There is a stream of reactions that stretch back forever into something thought labels ‘the past’. Life flows, and I react. Sensations arise and thought labels some as sadness, others as joy. The thought story isn’t going to go away. Thoughts won’t vanish in seeing there is no self. However, there is no need to believe in the thought story anymore.

Hmmm…what you wrote is all about a “me’! How is what you have written known? What is labelled as ‘sadness’ appears, there is no denying that. Just like when you stub a toe, pain appears, there is no denying that either.

However, is sadness happening to a separate self…to a me? Or does a story arise ABOUT a ‘me’ who is sad? Just like the story of a separate self appears, that can’t be denied either, but when you LOOK do you find a separate self anywhere?

Sadness only persists and builds when I resist it, when I think “I am sad…oh dear”, and let the story of sadness take over: “Iain is inclined to sadness…Iain needs X, Y or Z or avoid sadness…Iain deserves to be sad because he didn’t receive enough love as a child etc etc”.

Resistance is impossible, how can what already is be resisted? It is only an appearing thought that says “I am resisting ………”. Thoughts are actual experience (AE) and either point to actual experience or thought stories. Can a sensation or thought be resisted? What is it exactly that is resisting?

If I simply look at the sensation and the labeling and be aware of the story but don’t grip or believe it then I can release into the life and reactions flowing towards me. I can see the thoughts as simply commentary, the thought that I either need to or could act to influence emotion as a powerless empty thought, and in doing so that grip naturally is released, and I can sit back and await the next response, sensations and chapter of the story.

What is exactly “gripping, believing or letting go” of the story? Can you “grip or believe in” a sound or “release” a sound? If not, then how can you grip, believe or release a thought or thought stories?

Undeniably there are a myriad of labels and thoughts appearing about sadness. Undeniably there is no chooser selecting sadness.

Great! :)

How are you traveling with what we have explored so far? What is happening for you?

The journey is delightful thanks. Your skill in guiding equally so. I feel I am in a roll with things beginning to look and feel clearer. All the thoughts that limited my seeing before are feeling more powerless and empty.

That is great to hear, Iain. Thought is often made out to be your enemy, in the search for truth, but it’s not. It is just an appearance that arises and subsides. However, if you don't notice the difference between what thought says about reality, and how you find reality to actually be, you won't notice your innate peace and freedom.

Love, Kay

Dear Kay,

What exactly is it that “reacts and responds to the flow of life”?

Options present themselves, and choices are made, but I cannot find a chooser making the choices. Reactions take place, and familiar thoughts babble about what has happened and what might happen next. Events lead to events and onwards to further events. Perhaps it is better to call ‘choices’ simply actions as choices suggest a chooser separate from the choice. Only a separate person could have reactions and responses taking place separately to the ongoing flow of events and actions taking place. All there is though is one action following from another and then on to another. Actions commence, and other actions follow from these actions. There is nothing to be found that causes an action. There is no Iain I can find that is the cause, and the effect the action he has chosen.

However, is sadness happening to a separate self…to a me? Or does a story arise ABOUT a ‘me’ who is sad? Just like the story of a separate self appears, that can’t be denied either, but when you LOOK do you find a separate self anywhere?

Good point. Closer would have been Life does not bring uncomfortable feelings or an experience of sadness. Experiences happen and sensations arise. Sensations arise and thought points towards these. Thought also points to stories with their labels running about a sad person experiencing life, a happy person experiencing life, a person doing all sorts of things. However if I take a break from the stories and look at the sensation there is no sadness or joy there, and no person or self outside of thought story having that feeling, being brought that feeling, deserving or not deserving that feeling.

I've only answered two of your four questions. I will get the other two answered soon.

Spending lots of time with these directions is helping me see what you are pointing towards. It's one step and an inch forward, then one step back, but I will keep looking.

Love, Iain

Dear Kay,

Resistance is impossible, how can what already is be resisted? It is only an appearing thought that says “I am resisting ………”. Thoughts are actual experience (AE) and either point to actual experience or thought stories. Can a sensation or thought be resisted? What is it exactly that is resisting?

There is no end to sensations experienced or thoughts experienced. The thought may appear ‘this is a pleasant sensation’ or ‘this is an unpleasant sensation’ but it is only when an imagined self that can suffer or be relieved is present that such a self can be at the centre of a thought story of resistance.

What is exactly “gripping, believing or letting go” of the story? Can you “grip or believe in” a sound or “release” a sound? If not, then how can you grip, believe or release a thought or thought stories?

Good point. Either there is a thought of a self who is experiencing, or there is experience and thought while knowing that there could be no self experiencing or thinking. Sounds can be experienced only and cannot be gripped or released as that would require inventing a gripper and releaser in thought.

Love, Iain

Hello Iain,

Before I respond to your post, I would like for you to tell your process on LOOKING.

Let's say for example I ask you "what is it exactly that is having reactions", how do you go about LOOKING to see if you can find anyone/anything that is reacting.

Love, Kay

Dear Kay,

how do you go about LOOKING to see if you can find anyone/anything that is reacting?

I put an answer to your question together yesterday Kay, and worked on it again today. It's a story of 'I do this' and 'I do that' though, filled with assumptions all about a “me’. I want to look at it again before responding.

Love, Iain

Hi Iain,

Your response was enough to tell me that you aren't sure on how to LOOK, and that would make this exploration very difficult. Looking is a nice simple thing - there is no need to over-complicate it.

Just look now...a thought can be found, but can a thinker of thought be found?
Can an “I” be found in thought itself?

Sound can be found, but can a hearer of sounds be found?
Can an “I” be found in sound itself?

Colour can be found, but can a see-er of colour be found?
Can an “I” be found in colour itself?


Sensation can be found, but can a feeler of sensation be found?
Can an “I” be found in sensation itself?

Smell can be found, but can a smeller of smell be found?
Can an “I” be found in smell itself?

Taste can be found, but can a taster of taste be found?
Can an “I” be found in taste itself?

Experience can be found, but can an experiencer of experience be found?
It's as simple as that. Just look and see what is actually present - and what is only imaginary.


Also the way to LOOK at 'fear' is also another way to LOOK.

You just replace the label 'fear' with a prevailing thought or with another label and you LOOK to see if you can find anyone/anything in the thought, the sensation, the colour and smell and taste if they appear. I will repost the way to look at 'fear' again. It may seem like a lot of effort to LOOK, but once you get used of looking, it becomes simple and if you are consistent at looking, then looking becomes automatic.

Let’s have a LOOK at ‘fear’. I want you to ask the questions of yourself as you are LOOKING.

1. Close the eyes and see the word ‘fear’ in the mind’s eye and ask yourself if the label/word ‘fear’ knows anything about fear. And just be firm with the mind and stay with the word ‘fear’, no matter what other words the mind brings up…and just focus on the word ‘fear’. See the word ‘f e a r’ in your mind’s eye, across the forehead and ask yourself if that word knows anything about fear or are they just letters?

2. With eyes still closed, go to the sensation (wherever it is mainly located in the body) and ask yourself if the sensation itself knows anything about fear? Can a sensation actually know anything about fear?

Have a look within the sensation and behind the sensation to see if you can locate anyone/anything that is in fear or that is creating the fear.

3. As your eyes are closed…a mental image/outline or an idea of a ‘me’ may appear, I want you to ask yourself if that image/outline/idea can know anything about fear?

And have a look around carefully everywhere, still with your eyes closed…and have a look if you can find anything that can be in fear.

And when you have looked to see if you can find anyone/anything in actual experience....then look around carefully, like you did in the 'looking for the gap between thought' exercise to see if you can find the separate self anywhere at all.

Let me know if you have any questions about LOOKING.

Love, Kay