The Gate

Hi Kay,
I am still working on this. Will post an update shortly!
Thanks,
Lisa

Hi Kay,

Exactly! The ‘tree’ is colour, the colour isn’t the tree. It’s like a painting of a tree. The tree is paint, the paint isn’t the tree. Experience/THIS is not a tree, the tree is experience. There is that subtle difference which is so easily overlooked! All these ‘things’, will always be experience, but experience will never be one of those ‘things’.

I understand what you are saying although I'm not actually sure this is what I am experiencing. Or I'm forgetting it when I look.

Are you beginning to see how thought overlays experience/THIS quite convincingly with stories which then veils the simplicity of what actually is? It is the stories that create the illusion of separation and the idea of there being a separate self to what actually IS.

When doing the tree exercise, I can see that how the labels create separation with the A/E of color.

So I invite you to do this exercise:

Think of a cup. Get a very clear picture in your mind. See clearly the size, shape, colour and volume of the cup. Notice whether it is decorated or plain. Notice whether it has a handle. Notice whether it is heavy or fragile. Do you have a clear picture in mind?

Yes

Now, can you physically grasp that image of a cup?

no

Can you pour tea into it?

no

Can you drink from it?

no

Is there a ‘real’ cup or just a mental image of a cup?

mental image

Is the content of the mental image (the cup) ‘real’?

no


Now let’s look at the word thought “here is a cup”….

Can a 'real' cup be found in the thought itself?

No

"Here is a cup" is the thought; the ensuing thoughts of what a cup is and does, what it is made from etc are the content of that thought. What do those thoughts point to exactly? Do they point to colour, taste, smell, sensation or sound? Or do they simply point to actual experience of thought and thought only?

They point to A/E of thought.

So thoughts and mental images are actual experience only as arising thoughts (words and mental image), their ‘presence’ cannot be denied. However their contents, what they are about, what they are pointing to (like the cup) are not ‘real’, they are just fantasies. Can you see this?

It's very easy to see with thoughts having to do with "pride" or any type of emotion really. Even with a situation at home, the mind has all sorts of interpretations/stories about that particular situation but none of it points to anything real. It's a little harder with a cup, especially if I'm imagining a cup then holding it in my hand. I have to remind myself that it's A/E of color.

Over the course of the next day or so, I'd like you to notice the content of thoughts. Whenever there is an arising thought or mental image, check whether its content (what it’s about, what it is pointing to) is REALLY happening, or the content is just pure imagination. Let me know how it goes.

Do you want me to go into specifics here? After doing this exercise, it's clear to me that I'm living my life in the content, or totally bought in to the content even though it's not real.

Lisa

Hello Lisa,

Exactly! The ‘tree’ is colour, the colour isn’t the tree. It’s like a painting of a tree. The tree is paint, the paint isn’t the tree. Experience/THIS is not a tree, the tree is experience. There is that subtle difference which is so easily overlooked! All these ‘things’, will always be experience, but experience will never be one of those ‘things’.

I understand what you are saying although I'm not actually sure this is what I am experiencing. Or I'm forgetting it when I look.

How can this be experienced directly exactly? It is like wanting to experience what it is like to be a tree, the sun, a dog etc! Most of this is all knowledge based, as a means of pointing to get you to LOOK and for you to see what is being pointed at. It is the LOOKING that brings the realisation of there being no separate self and what reality actually is.

The realisation is an insight, an aha moment and cannot be undone or unseen. The point of the AE exercises in the beginning, of you breaking down activities, objects and emotions was for you to get into the habit of doing that…so that when you look at something, you just automatically break it down into AE and see what actually IS, instead of thoughts stories about it. Unless you actually implement what you learn from the pointing etc, then this exploration is pointless. You actually have to do the work and LOOK every day, day in and day out, all day, every day.

Are you beginning to see how thought overlays experience/THIS quite convincingly with stories which then veils the simplicity of what actually is? It is the stories that create the illusion of separation and the idea of there being a separate self to what actually IS.

When doing the tree exercise, I can see that how the labels create separation with the A/E of color.

Here is a suggestion on how to go about your day and taking absolutely EVERYTHING at face value.

You're in the kitchen and you hear a song playing from the other room. Of course, it’s only thought that says that, isn't it? So take that thought for face value. Then look again, that song isn't coming from anywhere is it? In fact, it is not a song at all, is it? Only thought says it’s a song. In reality it’s just sound. So, stick with that, discard everything that isn't obvious and apparent.

When sitting in a café enjoying a coffee. Do the same. Look around and thought will say that you are looking at other people drinking coffee. But that is only thought that says that, isn’t it? So take the thought at face value ie as the AE of thought only. LOOK again. What thought points to as people, are in fact not people at all, but colour.

At work you are getting anxious because you aren’t able to meet a deadline. But that is only thought that says that, isn’t it? But LOOK again. What thought points to as a person at work getting anxious is in fact, sensation.

Do the same with smell and taste.

This will help in breaking down what SEEMS to be happening into what actually IS.
Let me know how you go

So thoughts and mental images are actual experience only as arising thoughts (words and mental image), their ‘presence’ cannot be denied. However their contents, what they are about, what they are pointing to (like the cup) are not ‘real’, they are just fantasies. Can you see this?

It's very easy to see with thoughts having to do with "pride" or any type of emotion really. Even with a situation at home, the mind has all sorts of interpretations/stories about that particular situation but none of it points to anything real. It's a little harder with a cup, especially if I'm imagining a cup then holding it in my hand. I have to remind myself that it's A/E of color.

Yes, you will have to remind yourself that a ‘cup’ is AE of colour and not AE of a cup. When you learned to swim or write….did you not have to continually practice swimming or writing for it to become automatic. These exercises I give you are no different, especially the one about breaking down activities, objects and emotions into AE. As I said above, you have to actually implement these exercises into daily life and LOOK.

Over the course of the next day or so, I'd like you to notice the content of thoughts. Whenever there is an arising thought or mental image, check whether its content (what it’s about, what it is pointing to) is REALLY happening, or the content is just pure imagination. Let me know how it goes.

Do you want me to go into specifics here? After doing this exercise, it's clear to me that I'm living my life in the content, or totally bought in to the content even though it's not real.

Yes, could you give me a couple of specifics please.

Here is a step-by-step description of how to look at thoughts. First thing is to sit for at least 10-15 minutes quietly somewhere, several times throughout your day. Close the eyes and just notice thoughts. Don’t engage with any thought, just notice them.

Looking for the gap is a way to slow the thoughts, as the objective of this exercise is to observe each and every thought as it arises and subsides.

1. Notice the current thought that is present.
Like when you sit observing the body, a thought might arise “this is my feet” or “here is a pain” or “my breathing is too quick” or “I am bored with this exercise” or “I have better things to do” or any sorts of thoughts.

2. This thought will pass and another thought will come. So just observe this thought passing.

3. Then wait for the next thought to come.

4. When the next thought is present, just notice it, and see how it passes.

5. Then wait for the next thought to come.

6. Repeat #4 and #5 many-many times.

Between the 2 thoughts there is a gap. It can be very short or subtle, just a second or a few seconds before the next thought come in.

This is how to look at thoughts.
Looking how they come and go.
And observing the short gap between them.
Noticing how the current thought is passing.
And waiting for the next thought to come.

Please do the following exercise:
Throughout your waking day, try to observe the gap between thoughts as often as possible. It can be done by noticing that ‘thinking’ is happening right now, then stop and just simply wait for the next thought to come. In the ‘waiting’ there is a gap between two thoughts.
Let me know how you go.

Can a thinker of thought be found between the gaps?

Kay

Hi Kay,
I will continue to do this but wanted to respond.

This will help in breaking down what SEEMS to be happening into what actually IS.
Let me know how you go

Definitely getting the hang of this but need more practice. Taste, smell, and sound are easiest. Little but more challenging with color, except when I’m driving. And as far as sensation, I could see how ‘fear’ was sensation and thought though it still feels real though.

Can a thinker of thought be found between the gaps?

I’m not sure how it is with most people but the gaps are so quick that they are barely perceptible. The thought stream is almost constant. And it’s hard to decipher each and every thought, one from the next. I’m not sure how important that is but they just sort of blend together. In any case, I was not able to find an actual thinker of thought. Thoughts just come.

Lisa

Hey Lisa,

Lovely looking!

I will continue to do this but wanted to respond.

Yes...it is good to continue to break down activities, objects and emotions into AE on a daily basis until it becomes second nature and happens automatically without you having to effort in doing so.

This will help in breaking down what SEEMS to be happening into what actually IS.
Let me know how you go

Definitely getting the hang of this but need more practice. Taste, smell, and sound are easiest. Little but more challenging with color, except when I’m driving. And as far as sensation, I could see how ‘fear’ was sensation and thought though it still feels real though.

Well sensation is real, as is thought…however, just not as thought seemingly describes them as. But it is important that activities, objects and sensations are continually broken down into AE. The more you do this then it becomes automatic and there is no efforting to do it. It becomes like second nature. But this is one of the keys to not only this exploration, but to being able to stay on track after realisation has happened, as looking still needs to happen after as well.

“I could see how ‘fear’ was sensation and thought though it still feels real though” is simply an appearing thought. Does this thought know anything about reality of fear, or is it simply a thought that arises and subsides?

The label ‘fear’ is AE of thought and not AE of fear
Sensation labelled ‘fear’ is AE of sensation and not AE of fear
Image labelled as ‘body/me’ is AE of colour and not AE of a fearful person
Thoughts ABOUT fear, what it is, etc and the story that SEEMS to create ‘fear’ are AE of thought and not AE of fear.

So what is known is label + sensation + colour + thoughts, however is fear actually known?

Can a thinker of thought be found between the gaps?

I’m not sure how it is with most people but the gaps are so quick that they are barely perceptible. The thought stream is almost constant. And it’s hard to decipher each and every thought, one from the next. I’m not sure how important that is but they just sort of blend together. In any case, I was not able to find an actual thinker of thought. Thoughts just come.

Lovely! There is just a stream of thought. Where does thought begin and end? There is no fullstop in thought as there is in written words! So you got to see how thoughts just come and go and that within those thoughts there is no thinker. Wonderful job of LOOKING.

Okay, so looking for the gap exercise was not only for you to see that thoughts simply appear and there is no end or beginning of thought, but also to prepare you for the following thought exercise…which is another that asks you observe thoughts.

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

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.

Where are they coming from and going to?

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?
Can you predict your next thought?

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 prevent a thought from appearing?
Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle?

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

Love, Kay

Hi Kay,
I did end up having to do this several times.

“I could see how ‘fear’ was sensation and thought though it still feels real though” is simply an appearing thought. Does this thought know anything about reality of fear, or is it simply a thought that arises and subsides?

It's a thought that arises and subsides.

So what is known is label + sensation + colour + thoughts, however is fear actually known?

No, it's not.

Where are they coming from and going to?

I honestly don't know. They seem to come out of nothing and go back to nothing.

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

No.

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

No.

Can you predict your next thought?

No.

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

No. (I wish.)

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

Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?

No.

Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing?

No.

Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle?

No.

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

Well, as an example, there was a thought about what to have for dinner, then another thought about salmon. Thought says one followed the other.

Lisa

Hello Lisa,

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

No. (I wish.)

Yes, so if there was an actual thinker/controller of thought, then wouldn’t it make sense that you would only choose to have pleasant and positive thoughts?

Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle?

No.

Where is the middle of a thought exactly?

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

Well, as an example, there was a thought about what to have for dinner, then another thought about salmon. Thought says one followed the other.

That doesn’t answer the question. Please look carefully and answer the question.


Thought 1: I’m hungry
Thought 2: I think there’s some bread in the fridge (possible mental image of bread in fridge)
Thought 3: No there isn’t, I ate it last night
Thought 4: I could go to the shops (possible mental image of shops)
…
Thought 27: I have been thinking about food.

Now when we look at this, do we find thought 27 has any knowledge of any of the other thoughts, let alone all of them? It seems that way, but when we look closely, what is found?

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. Notice how the sports commentator is like the 'inner narrator' labelled 'my thoughts'.

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 how you feel and what you notice when the sound is on and when the sound is off. Also, 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?

Kay

Hi Kay,
I will watch the video but just wanted to respond to the previous questions.

Yes, so if there was an actual thinker/controller of thought, then wouldn’t it make sense that you would only choose to have pleasant and positive thoughts?

Yes, exactly.

Where is the middle of a thought exactly?

A thought seems to last a second or two. Maybe even shorter than that if it's an image. While looking at a thought, i'm not able to tell where the middle is exactly then stop the thought. The thought just comes and goes on its own.

Now when we look at this, do we find thought 27 has any knowledge of any of the other thoughts, let alone all of them? It seems that way, but when we look closely, what is found?

No, thoughts do not have knowledge of previous thoughts. I can see how the thought that says they are linked, makes it seem like there is a thinker or doer.

OK, watching the video now...
Thanks,
Lisa

Hey Lisa,

I will respond in full when you have done the sports exercise video.

Kay

Hi Kay,

Let me know how you feel and what you notice when the sound is on and when the sound is off.

Ok, I did this a few times. I honestly cannot say that I "felt" any different watching with the sound off versus watching with the sound off. The commentary clearly had no impact on what was happening and is basically just background noise. More of nuisance than anything. (We often watch sports at home with the sound turned off.)

Also, when you turn the sound on and off, and without thought, what is actually appearing/happening etc?

With sound off, there is just color and movement.

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

No, not in the least.

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

No, it for sure is happening but it's not a necessity.

Thanks,
Lisa

Hey Lisa,

Now when we look at this, do we find thought 27 has any knowledge of any of the other thoughts, let alone all of them? It seems that way, but when we look closely, what is found?

No, thoughts do not have knowledge of previous thoughts. I can see how the thought that says they are linked, makes it seem like there is a thinker or doer.

Lovely! So do thoughts know anything? Do thoughts actually know if thoughts are random or not?

Let me know how you feel and what you notice when the sound is on and when the sound is off.

Ok, I did this a few times. I honestly cannot say that I "felt" any different watching with the sound off versus watching with the sound off. The commentary clearly had no impact on what was happening and is basically just background noise. More of nuisance than anything. (We often watch sports at home with the sound turned off.)

This exercise was to get you to see that narrator of the game is no different to the narrator labelled as ‘my thoughts’ and that the game played is no different to life unfolding.

Listen to the nuances of the game. The emotion that the football narrator puts into his voice from excitement to concern, to enthusiasm, to disappointment etc, and how that ‘sucks you in’ to feeling the game...being part of the game. Watch how you react (by focusing on the body sensations ie contractions etc) when the crowd cheers and so on. This was for you to see how the narrator seemingly sucks you into the story of a self that is living life, that is being narrated by thought. Thought tells you that you are feeling sad, happy, frightened, angry and so on. But is this really the case?

So please redo the sound on and off and tell me what is experienced when sound is on and when sound is off.

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

No, it for sure is happening but it's not a necessity.

To what exactly is it happening to? For there to be an inner narrator would mean that there is an “I” who is being narrated to. Can you find this “I”? If so, please describe it to me in precise detail and tell me where it is located

So let’s have a look at the idea of control, choice and decisions.

1. Hold a hand in front of you; palm turned down.
2. Now turn the palm up. And down...and up and so on.

Watch like a hawk.

Don't go to thoughts, examine the actual experience. Do this as many times as you like, and each time inquire…

How is the movement controlled?
Does a thought control it?
Can a ‘controller’ of any description be located?
How is the decision made to turn the hand over? Track any decision point when a thought MADE THE DECISION to turn the hand over and the hand turns over immediately.
Can you find a separate individual or anything that is choosing when to turn the palm up or down?

Love, Kay

Hi Kay,

So do thoughts know anything? Do thoughts actually know if thoughts are random or not?

A thought doesn't know anything and can't know if thoughts are random or not.

So please redo the sound on and off and tell me what is experienced when sound is on and when sound is off.

When the sound is off, there is little to no emotion. What is happening on the screen simply happens. When the sound is on, there is more emotion and sensation being felt and much more investment in what is going on.

To what exactly is it happening to? For there to be an inner narrator would mean that there is an “I” who is being narrated to. Can you find this “I”? If so, please describe it to me in precise detail and tell me where it is located

Ok, so that inner narrator/stream of thought just keeps coming and going but there is something that is aware of those thoughts that feels like a "me". It feels as if it's located above the shoulders and behind the eyes.

How is the movement controlled?

I really am not able to tell. The movement just happens.

Does a thought control it?

I don't notice any thoughts as it happens. Or at least there is nothing that says "turn over now" or "don't turn over".

Can a ‘controller’ of any description be located?

I cannot find a "controller".

How is the decision made to turn the hand over? Track any decision point when a thought MADE THE DECISION to turn the hand over and the hand turns over immediately.

I cannot find anything that actually "decides" or make a "decision". There are thoughts happening...and my hand is turning over and back again but I don't see a link.

Can you find a separate individual or anything that is choosing when to turn the palm up or down?

No. I had always assumed you "make up your mind" or "decide" to do something but I'm not finding a mind or an individual doing that.

Thanks,
Lisa

Hi Lisa,

So please redo the sound on and off and tell me what is experienced when sound is on and when sound is off.

When the sound is off, there is little to no emotion. What is happening on the screen simply happens. When the sound is on, there is more emotion and sensation being felt and much more investment in what is going on.

Thank for doing that. It was important that you saw how it is thought that seems to gives credence to thoughts, and how we are invested in some thoughts/thought stories more than others…and it is those invested thoughts that seem to create the emotions etc and describes how life is and what it is doing and if it is good or bad. But thoughts no nothing. Does the narrator of a book know anything other than the words they are reading? Thought is no different.

To what exactly is it happening to? For there to be an inner narrator would mean that there is an “I” who is being narrated to. Can you find this “I”? If so, please describe it to me in precise detail and tell me where it is located

Ok, so that inner narrator/stream of thought just keeps coming and going but there is something that is aware of those thoughts that feels like a "me". It feels as if it's located above the shoulders and behind the eyes.

Experience/Presence/Knowing/THIS (or whatever you call it) is whole, seamless and complete. It is only thought that divides experience by labelling experience as sound and thought and colour and smell and taste and sensation. So there is nothing that is aware of thought…because without thought, how would what is appearing be known as thought? However, yes there is knowing of what is labelled as ‘thought, because knowing (experience) knows itself.

So let’s investigate the idea of there being something that is located above the shoulders and behind the eyes thoroughly with the following three exercises. Once we have done that…I will come back to the palm exercise that you did.

Exercsie 1 - Let’s examine the solidity of the head.

Please IGNORE all thoughts and images of ‘head’ and ‘fingers’ and just answer from actual experience. Close your eyes and take in a couple of deep breaths to settle the dust and keeping your eyes closed...

Press a finger down onto the top of the ‘head’.
Notice what is actually present.
Is it a head, or is it just a sensation (labelled ‘pressure’) and thoughts ABOUT a head?

Do the same with a finger on each side of the head.
Is a head actually found, or are there just sensations again?
And is there anything between the pressure points, or are there just thoughts about something being in between them

Without thought, how big is your head?
Without thought, does it have an inside or an outside?
Without thought, does it have a location?


Exercsie 2 - Examining the foreheadI

It is generally believed that thoughts are coming from the head. When we try to trace back the origin of a thought, it is often believed that it's coming from the forehead, because the attention automatically goes to the sensation of the forehead. Investigate this carefully as often as you can throughout the day.

Have a very deep look here... the forehead is one of the 'residence' of the SENSE of self. Or rather say, the sensation that is labelled as forehead is believed to be one of the location of the sense of self.

What is the forehead in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image (of a forehead), right?

So, can a thought come from a sensation?
Can a thought come from a mental image?


Exercise 3 - Examining the eyes

It's also believed that 'visual sight' is coming from the eyes, because when it's investigated the attention automatically goes to the sensation 'of the eyes', and at the same time the image 'of the eyes' appear with it.

So another SENSE of self is linked to the sensation 'of the eyes'.

What are the eyes in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image, right?

Can sight come from a sensation?
Can sight come from an image (of the eyes)?

Can a 'mental image' come from a sensation?
Can a 'mental image' come from another mental image (of the eyes)?


With love,
Kay

Hi Kay,
I woke up early and had some time to do this.

Is it a head, or is it just a sensation (labelled ‘pressure’) and thoughts ABOUT a head?

Just sensation and thoughts/images about a head.

Is a head actually found, or are there just sensations again?
And is there anything between the pressure points, or are there just thoughts about something being in between them

I can't find a "head" or anything between the pressure points.

Without thought, how big is your head?

I have no idea.

Without thought, does it have an inside or an outside?

No.

Without thought, does it have a location?

No.

What is the forehead in the actual experience?

Sensation and an image.

A sensation + a mental image (of a forehead), right?

Yes.

So, can a thought come from a sensation?

No. I actually don't really know where thought is coming from.

Can a thought come from a mental image?

No.

What are the eyes in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image, right?

Yes.

Can sight come from a sensation?

No.

Can sight come from an image (of the eyes)?

No.

Can a 'mental image' come from a sensation?

No

Can a 'mental image' come from another mental image (of the eyes)?

No.

Thank you!
Lisa

Hi Lisa,

Ok, so that inner narrator/stream of thought just keeps coming and going but there is something that is aware of those thoughts that feels like a "me". It feels as if it's located above the shoulders and behind the eyes.

Okay...so now going back to the above, and from carefully looking at what thought calls a head, forehead and eyes, can an "I" of any description be found in anywhere?

When looking to find a head, could a head be found? Is a head actually known?
Does the sensation labelled as 'head' know anything about a head?
Does the sensation labelled as 'head' suggest in any way that it is a head?
So could either a head or an ""I be found in the sensation labelled as head?

When looking to find a forehead, could a forehead be found? Is a forehead actually known?
Does the sensation labelled as 'forehead' know anything about a forehead?
Does the sensation labelled as 'forehead' suggest in any way that it is a forehead?
So could either a forehead or an "I" be found in the sensation labelled as forehead?

When looking to find eyes, could eyes be found? Are eyes actually known?
Does the sensation labelled as 'eyes' know anything about a eyes?
Does the sensation labelled as 'eyes' suggest in any way that it is eyes?
So could eyes or an "I" be found in the sensation labelled as eyes?

When carefully looking...are there specific locations to where sensation labelled as head, forehead and eyes are supposedly found? In other words, does experience have a location?

Before we continue on with the palm exercise, I would like you to do this looking of what the head, forehead and eyes actually are ( (ie sensation) throughout your day, every day for at least 2-3 days, so that the idea that there is an "I" somewhere there, is clearly seen to be a story. In other words, whenever the idea appears of head, forehead and eyes look to see if they can actually be found or what is found are the stories about sensation being a head, forehead and eyes.

Love, Kay