The Gate

me too, thanks for the update

BINGO.
Forget right or wrong.
What would life look like without all that investment into an entity that exists only as an assumption?
Just sit with this a while and let the implications sink in.
really let them sink in.

I don't really know what the implications are. Life would look pretty similar since even though there's no entity, there is still all the same images, sounds, emotions, etc, occurring.

One thing I have found interesting is how the mind isn't as complex as I had sort of thought. I guess I thought I was walking around with this huge complex mind with a whole personality and life echoing about in there, as if I was carrying around a whole life in my head. But really the mind is nothing more than a couple of images and sounds at any given time. Really, the mind isn't separate from the world at all, but is just a couple of experiences that take the label mind. And it really is only a couple of experiences at any given moment, which is very simple compared to the old conception.

My mind isn't actually something that I can find. Like abstract concepts, it's just a label which applies to some specifics some of the time. I can find thoughts or mental images, which are thought to be aspects of mind, but I can't find mind itself. This isn't a problem, of course.

I suppose it doesn't feel like I'm carrying around a whole machine with me anymore, just a couple of perceptions at a time. But I still notice the word me in that thought...

Life would look pretty similar since even though there's no entity, there is still all the same images, sounds, emotions, etc, occurring.

That's fine, yes, I mean looking now, has there ever really been an entity in the first place?

is how the mind isn't as complex as I had sort of thought. I guess I thought I was walking around with this huge complex mind with a whole personality and life echoing about in there, as if I was carrying around a whole life in my head.

Yes, it's much simpler isn't it. I mean if an idea/thought about 'mind' 'the unconcious' 'personality' comes up, then they are just more thoughts, arising like ticker tape.

I'm not saying these ideas can't be very useful like anything in the right context, but it was a revelation when it became clear I didn't have to operate from those ideas all the time.

My mind isn't actually something that I can find.

If this has really been seen that's great! Can you see how the illusion of 'self' is in large part constructed out of ideas about this 'mind' as you have said. It's all part of the same process.

But I still notice the word me in that thought...

Is there anything wrong with the word 'me'?
Does the way language is used need to change?

That's fine, yes, I mean looking now, has there ever really been an entity in the first place?

I don't know... I can only look at now.

If this has really been seen that's great! Can you see how the illusion of 'self' is in large part constructed out of ideas about this 'mind' as you have said. It's all part of the same process

But even though it's clear that mind is just a label, I still can't get over this weird separation between me as an experiencer and the world I'm experiencing. As of there's a me experiencing this lack of mind.

Is there anything wrong with the word 'me'?
Does the way language is used need to change?

There right be nothing wrong with the word but I'm still attached to the concept it refers to.

I still can't get over this weird separation between me as an experiencer and the world I'm experiencing.

Ok, no problem. Go back right now to the current perceptual experience. Sounds, sensations, sights tastes and smells.
Find this experiencer in all that. Describe it to me.

Find the boundary seperating those two apparent things, the see-er and the sights, the hear-er and the sound, the feel-er and the felt.
Go through each aspect in turn.

Sure, there SEEMS to be an experiencer of life separate to life. Maybe the fact it SEEMS like that won't even change.
That's not the question.
The question is...is there really such a thing?
Or is it an illusion, a construct?

I'm still attached to the concept it refers to.

What me is that that can attach to concepts?
Describe in detail to me exactly how that 'attaching' mechanism operates.
I mean I can attach sticky note to my desk...plonk, two distinct object, sticky note. desk. there it goes, the glue on the back sticking to the desk. I can feel that attachment.
Is this 'attachment' like that?

Ok, no problem. Go back right now to the current perceptual experience. Sounds, sensations, sights tastes and smells.
Find this experiencer in all that. Describe it to me.

Find the boundary seperating those two apparent things, the see-er and the sights, the hear-er and the sound, the feel-er and the felt.
Go through each aspect in turn.

Sure, there SEEMS to be an experiencer of life separate to life. Maybe the fact it SEEMS like that won't even change.
That's not the question.
The question is...is there really such a thing?
Or is it an illusion, a construct?

Regarding each of the senses in isolation, like when I went through them with Xain, there is only the sights in seeing, only the sound in hearing, only the felt in feeling. There's no seer in sight, no hearer in hearing, no feeler in feeling. So regarding the boundary separating the two, there is no boundary between the seer and the seen in seeing.

With touch, I can feel the hand doing the feeling, but I can't find the me feeling the hand. So the feeling of the hand doesn't count as finding a feeler.

Is it possible that when I say I feel separate, I actually mean I THINK I'm separate? Is it possible that I don't actually FEEL separate at all, and I'm just not realising that feeling separate would not feel like life actually feels? Maybe I'm conditioned to regard this current feeling as the feeling of being separated, But the actual feelings available don't support it? I can't feel what It would logically be necessary to feel in order to feel separate in the way I say I feel. The only logical conclusion is that I don't actually FEEL separate at all, but I just keep saying that I do because I've been conditioned to do so and to not be able to see the difference.

What me is that that can attach to concepts?
Describe in detail to me exactly how that 'attaching' mechanism operates.
I mean I can attach sticky note to my desk...plonk, two distinct object, sticky note. desk. there it goes, the glue on the back sticking to the desk. I can feel that attachment.
Is this 'attachment' like that?

No, I guess not. I only meant to say that I still feel the kind of separation that the word me implies is real. The word attachment was just a bad word choice.

Thanks for your reply, I'm ill and having family issues at the moment, I will get back to you as soon as i'm able. In the meantime feel free to carr on writing out any reflections on what you are looking at.
x

Hi, Hannah. Will you even get this message? I abandoned our thread, didn't I? I feel awkward saying this but I don't think that was very respectful of me given what you and Xain have done for me so far. For that I'm sorry.

But I wanted to share with you that in the months I've been absent I've not stopped looking, and I really think I've got something.

There is just life. Just colours, sounds, etc. They just arise and then go away. They just Exist then don't Exist. This is the nature of life. The things which exist aren't evidently experienced by anything or perceived by anything. Not only can the experiencer not be found, but the notion of experience itself is not something which is obviously going on in this condition.

Nothing has changed. But the fact that there's no experiencer is about as obvious to me now as the fact that a circle is round.

As to what the self actually is, I still don't know about that. I just feel pretty confident that life is all there is. I feel pretty confident that there's no REAL 'self', but I'm totally confident that there's no experiencer or perceiver of life.