The Gate

Hi, John, I hope you have had a good time with your doughter!

I am going to write the sentence again though I dont know exactly which one. " when there is a looking at the reflection in a mirror there is an identification of that image with me, but based on memories and perhaps in the fact that if it is decided to close an eye! The reflection does the same"
Yes, it could be this way, based in my direct observation, without memories and without movement, there is no evidence of the reflection in the mirror being me. The reflection is an image,a measurable and limited thing and I dont perceive myself that way, but as a space. And I admit that what I believe it is me deciding wether close an eye or not could be a thought arisen without thinker. i understand that but I cant Feel or see without doubt that it is that way. The impression of me thinking or the me as the thinker is still here. But it is an interesting suggestion that the thoughts create a center made of thoughts.
Other thing I dont know what is "awareness". Is awareness the real ME ? Is awareness the sensation of me or is within the awareness? Is awareness real or is a illusion?
I can see the importance of seeing wether there is a thinker or just thoughts arising free, without a thinker. I observe untill i have a headache but I dont know if it is possible to see it.
I keep looking!

Hi Manuel

Hi, John, I hope you have had a good time with your doughter!

Thank you very much :)

I am going to write the sentence again though I dont know exactly which one. " when there is a looking at the reflection in a mirror there is an identification of that image with me, but based on memories and perhaps in the fact that if it is decided to close an eye! The reflection does the same"
Yes, it could be this way, based in my direct observation, without memories and without movement, there is no evidence of the reflection in the mirror being me. The reflection is an image,a measurable and limited thing and I dont perceive myself that way, but as a space. And I admit that what I believe it is me deciding wether close an eye or not could be a thought arisen without thinker. i understand that but I cant Feel or see without doubt that it is that way.

That's no problem Manuel, you're doing very well so far. It takes some people much longer to be able to discern between thoughts that can be confirmed by direct evidence and thoughts that are just telling stories about direct experience.

The impression of me thinking or the me as the thinker is still here. But it is an interesting suggestion that the thoughts create a center made of thoughts.

See if that is true or not. Look at direct experience and see whether there is an "I" or whether it's just a centre that thought has thought up for itself.

Other thing I dont know what is "awareness".

Awareness is another word for subjectivity really.

Is awareness the real ME ? Is awareness the sensation of me or is within the awareness?

These are very good questions, and the answer is yes and no, because the awareness of everything is not in anyway separate from everything. I just posted something on another thread about this exact subject where I try to explain this. Here is a link to the post I made http://www.liberationunleashed.com/nati ... 572#p32572

Is awareness real or is a illusion?

If there is awareness of this sentence then how could awareness be an illusion? :)

I can see the importance of seeing wether there is a thinker or just thoughts arising free, without a thinker. I observe untill i have a headache but I dont know if it is possible to see it.
I keep looking!

Do your best to find evidence of being the thinker of thoughts, and if you think you find any evidence that you are the thinker of thoughts.

Sit down and look very carefully and then see whether you can find any direct experiential evidence that you are the thinker of thoughts, and please report back to me.

Hi, John
I ve just read your post and though this may be a thought story I want to ask you abut awareness. A dog is aware of things around but it is not aware of being aware, but I am aware of that tree and at the same time I am aware thar i am aware, which perhaps creates a separation, a distance between me and the tree. In other words, isnt the Me or the I the result of that distance created by being aware of awareness. Is this being aware of awareness real or is it a thought?
I dont know if this make any sense but I wanted to write it now.
i have in mind our request of investigate wether there is a thinker of thouhts, question I find very difficult to answer from direct experience and not from a intelectual-thought process.

Hi Manuel

I ve just read your post and though this may be a thought story I want to ask you abut awareness. A dog is aware of things around but it is not aware of being aware,

Only thought tells you that a dog or anything or anyone else is aware. Direct experience does not. Even Manuel isn't aware, and nor is John. The ONLY awareness ANYWHERE is that which is aware of the reading of this sentence.

but I am aware of that tree and at the same time I am aware thar i am aware, which perhaps creates a separation, a distance between me and the tree.

First find out whether there is an "I" that is aware. There is awareness of 'this' but is it an "I" that is aware of 'this'? When you say "I" am aware what are you referring to? Do you find this "I" in direct experience? Do you find a dog's awareness in direct experience?

In other words, isnt the Me or the I the result of that distance created by being aware of awareness. Is this being aware of awareness real or is it a thought?

There is obviously awareness because if there wasn't awareness then you would not be aware of this sentence. And the fact that this sentence is discussing awareness means that the awareness that is aware of this sentence is aware of itself, BUT does this awareness have a location?

This is where direct experiential evidence is so important. It's very important to discover whether the awareness is located "in" anything which appears in direct experience. Thought says that awareness is located in things, but what does direct experiential evidence tell you? Look carefully at this question, and remember to stay as true to direct experiential as possible. When you reply please explain your answer.

i have in mind our request of investigate wether there is a thinker of thouhts, question I find very difficult to answer from direct experience and not from a intelectual-thought process.

That is why you need to ignore what the thoughts are about, and try to just notice them appearing. See whether you seem to have decided what the next thought would be, or whether it just seemed to follow other thoughts. See whether you are able to stop all thoughts, or whether you can decide to have no unhappy thoughts for a day. Try very hard to find some way to prove to me that you are the thinker of thoughts, but be discerning and think carefully about whether your proof is any proof at all.

Think about whether it's possible for there to be a personal "I" if you are not the thinker of thoughts? Remember that only the thought story says that thoughts happen in a brain.

Hi, John,
I think i am not making any ptprogress. In awaeness there is no evidence of a me. I cant find a me, but the impression of a center is still there. It is a thought but this is ot clearly perceived. Sometimes there seems to be some kind of center which is in control, not in total control, but in control. I think it is a center created artificially by thoughts, but I am not able of seeing it clearly. It is like the eye were trying to see itself.
I will writeyouif I find something new, i keep looking for the I or the thinker

Hi Manuel

Hi, John,
I think i am not making any ptprogress. In awaeness there is no evidence of a me. I cant find a me, but the impression of a center is still there. It is a thought but this is ot clearly perceived. Sometimes there seems to be some kind of center which is in control, not in total control, but in control.

You've made a lot of progress Manuel. You need to take a look at other threads to see how long it takes some people to notice the things that you already have. Don't worry about progress, I'll worry about that for you, and I'm very happy with your progress so far. This takes a fair amount of 'looking' before thought loses its centre. It is continual and careful noticing of the truth of direct experience that causes the whole structure to collapse under the weight of its own lie.

Now that you've discovered that you can find no I, lets look very closely at this "centre" that seems to be there.

This is a very important part of the enquiry. Sit quietly and try to discover what it is that gives you a sense of a 'centre', and try to find out, thought direct experience only, whether this 'centre' has any location at all. Does it seem to have a position in the field of perception. It's best to keep your eyes closed for the "location" enquiry.

I think it is a center created artificially by thoughts, but I am not able of seeing it clearly.

Ok, if you're unable to find this centre in direct experience then obviously it's just in thought. Try to discover the thoughts that give you the sense of a centre.

John, I cant tell you nothing because I am not making new findings. I see thoughts some of them seem to happen without "my will" and others semm to be motivated by me, for instance when I have the sense of deciding to think about what is the best way of resolving a problem or when I spend one hour thinking about what I should do tomorrow at work. I cant go further and the sense of I is as powerfull as it used to be.
Well I guess that being in a bad moment may have to do with this.
Thank you, John

Hi Manuel

I need you to answer the questions so that I can see what it is that makes you feel like you're 'blocked'. I've asked you some questions which you haven't answered. Here they are again. Please reply to them.

First find out whether there is an "I" that is aware. There is awareness of 'this' but is it an "I" that is aware of 'this'? When you say "I" am aware what are you referring to? Do you find this "I" in direct experience? Do you find a dog's awareness in direct experience?

There is obviously awareness because if there wasn't awareness then you would not be aware of this sentence. And the fact that this sentence is discussing awareness means that the awareness that is aware of this sentence is aware of itself, BUT does this awareness have a location?

This is where direct experiential evidence is so important. It's very important to discover whether the awareness is located "in" anything which appears in direct experience. Thought says that awareness is located in things, but what does direct experiential evidence tell you? Look carefully at this question, and remember to stay as true to direct experiential as possible. When you reply please explain your answer.

You say that thought seems to have a centre, but you're unable to find this centre in direct experience then obviously it's just in thought. Try to discover the thoughts that give you the sense of a centre.

Hi, John

I cannot find an I in awareness. I think awareness doesnt necessarily need an I, if I observe me there seems to be an I in the center though I can only find it in thoughts, but I have the impresion that awareness doesnt need a center. When I am walking down the street i can perceive my body, there are feelings I know they are in the body, but that is based on memory and imagination. I cant perceive myself within a body. There is boundless awareness, but in a subtle way I experience somehow some kind of center. For instance, that vague Me is "felt" more here than the tree which is there. So here and there are still present. But its true that the limits of my body, to a certain degree, "melt" into the big picture around or into the landscape.
About what kind of thoughts are perceived more like "I", the thought of I am this body, I have limits, I have my own life, things are separated one from each other, when pain or joy or pleasure appear there is the attached thought that it is My pleasure, My pain, My idéas, , my character, I make a choice, I have to struggle to survive, to defend myself of danger...all seems to be always referred to a Me. Nevertheless I have the suspicion that the me is a ghost, is not real, that is the reason I am attracted to this kind of things, I guess life can be different, more truthful, more natural...without this mental jail. I have the desire of being released from the prison of this little and fearful ME.
Sometimes I think that liberation may be a simple hope perhaps made up by my mind which is looking for happiness or a better life, peace, etc, or that this liberation is for a few people in the world, and not for me.
Once you beguin to question things, you dont know for sure what is real and what is an illusion.

Certainly I cant perceived or have the evidence of awareness in a dog or any other being. I can only experience my awareness, or I can only experience awareness but not the awareness of others. In other words, as far as I am concern there is only ONE awareness, not two or more.

Hi Manuel

I cannot find an I in awareness. I think awareness doesnt necessarily need an I, if I observe me there seems to be an I in the center though I can only find it in thoughts, but I have the impresion that awareness doesnt need a center.

This observation should be seen in conjunction with an earlier statement that you made, in which you said: "The reflection is an image,a measurable and limited thing and I dont perceive myself that way, but as a space."

Does this space space have a centre? Stuff shows up in this 'space', and we call that stuff the field of perception, but does direct experience tell you that it has a centre? Be sure to confirm your thoughts with direct experience when answering this.

When I am walking down the street i can perceive my body, there are feelings I know they are in the body, but that is based on memory and imagination. I cant perceive myself within a body.

Ok, so you can not perceive yourself within a body, and if I reword your sentence as follows: "When there is walking down the street there is perception of a body, there are feelings that seem to be related to the body, but that is based on memory and imagination"; do you see that what I wrote is a far closer to a description of direct experience than your sentence is?

Do you see that saying that the body and sensations appear in this 'space' is far closer to direct experiential evidence than saying that the 'space' appears in the body?

There is boundless awareness, but in a subtle way I experience somehow some kind of center. For instance, that vague Me is "felt" more here than the tree which is there.

I love that you notice this 'boundlessness' of awareness. Notice that it shows up as an entire universe of planets and people, with another universe of imagination, sensation, and emotion, and still has infinite room to spare :)

As for this imagined "center", it's only in thought, and it's only because thought ALONE says that there is anything other than you that has any experience. Thought says that a dog has experience, and that people have experience, and that trees have experience, but what does direct experience tell you?

Other than the direct experience that you are aware of, there is no experience ANYWHERE else. Do not believe thoughts that can't be confirmed by direct experiential evidence.

The tree is experienced just as much "here" as a thought is experienced "here". Both show up in this 'space' that's aware of itself. Only thought says that sensation is "closer" in experience than the tree is, because thought says that it's possible that the tree has experience too. "Others" are experienced just as closely as emotions are, but thought says that "others" have their own experiences, and that they must be separate from 'this'. But what does direct experience tell you?

So here and there are still present. But its true that the limits of my body, to a certain degree, "melt" into the big picture around or into the landscape.

What you're really saying is that the sense of "me" is not limited to the body, in direct experience, when thought is not believed.

About what kind of thoughts are perceived more like "I", the thought of I am this body, I have limits, I have my own life, things are separated one from each other, when pain or joy or pleasure appear there is the attached thought that it is My pleasure, My pain, My idéas, , my character, I make a choice, I have to struggle to survive, to defend myself of danger...all seems to be always referred to a Me.

Yes it SEEMS so, but only because of what thought says. Thought has thought up a centre for itself and now claims to be located in a "me". Thought then says that any pain or pleasure belongs to this "me" idea. It also says that there are others that have better or worse experiences, but it lies. There are no other experiences anywhere.

Nevertheless I have the suspicion that the me is a ghost, is not real, that is the reason I am attracted to this kind of things, I guess life can be different, more truthful, more natural...without this mental jail. I have the desire of being released from the prison of this little and fearful ME.

Direct experience is always truthful and natural, and the "mental jail" is made up of nothing but thoughts that you are not the thinker of. These thoughts appear, along with sensations, emotions, people, planets, and a whole universe. You are never the "I" thought. You are already this utterly free 'space' in which all of this stuff shows up - including thoughts about not being free.

The idea that you are not free does not in any way affect your freedom. This 'space' accepts everything, and rejects nothing. Thoughts of being 'trapped' are allowed to show up in this space, as freely as trees and birds are.

Sometimes I think that liberation may be a simple hope perhaps made up by my mind which is looking for happiness or a better life, peace, etc, or that this liberation is for a few people in the world, and not for me.

These are just more thoughts showing up in this utterly free space that you always are. There are no "others" who are liberated. There are no "others" who have experience or thoughts. Those "others" are also just stuff showing up in "this".

Once you beguin to question things, you dont know for sure what is real and what is an illusion.

And this is why it's most important to rely on direct experiential evidence when testing thoughts about "this".

Hi John
"Thought then says that any pain or pleasure belongs to this "me" idea. It also says that there are others that have better or worse experiences, but it lies. There are no other experiences anywhere."
I find this stunning. I wouldnt know to tell why, perhaps because I take for granted there are others with better or worse experiences.

Hi Manuel

"Thought then says that any pain or pleasure belongs to this "me" idea. It also says that there are others that have better or worse experiences, but it lies. There are no other experiences anywhere."
I find this stunning. I wouldnt know to tell why, perhaps because I take for granted there are others with better or worse experiences.

Is it any more stunning than discovering that 'Manuel' also experiences nothing? Isn't it just as stunning to find that you were taking 'Manuel's' awareness for granted, and to discover that 'Manuel' has no awareness? :)

There are also a couple of other questions in my last post that you haven't answered yet.

Hello, John, I thought I had posted an answer I had written but I realize it doesn`t appear I dont know why
About the question of Does the space have a center? I would say no, but to be honest there is somehow the thought or something ingrained that make me feel like it is a center (My attention, my experience...) I must say I dont experience this through the senses, it is more thought stuff, but however there is this sensation, this kind of feeling that there is a me which is a center, though it is created by thoughts, it is "here" somehow. If I told you there is no center in experience, I d be saying there is no me, and that is something "intellectual" but not really experienced. I dont know if I am explaining this properly. I try not to say anything I dont really experience, because I ve read a lot of books and I have to check carefully if what I say is something read or known or something experienced.
When I observe, there is awareness but though there seems to be a me, a center, I cant tell what it is or where.

John, I think i dont understand:

Is it any more stunning than discovering that 'Manuel' also experiences nothing? Isn't it just as stunning to find that you were taking 'Manuel's' awareness for granted, and to discover that 'Manuel' has no awareness? :)