The Gate

[quote]As discussed earlier, this exploration is about 'unlearning', and that includes unlearning what you think you intellectually understand. It has been my experience that those with an intellectual understanding and those that think they know what THIS is all about and how things should happen, what seeing should look like etc, find it the hardest to LOOK and see. Why? Because they rely upon that intellectual understanding and use it to think. This exploration isn't about thinking, it is about LOOKING because it is through LOOKING that the recognition comes.
[quote]

Kay, fair enough. I am good with this. I am willing to look. Lead on....

Hey Ken,

Okay, so please continue to break down all experiences into AE over the next few days, so that it becomes almost automatic to see what is actually appearing as opposed to what thought says is appearing.

Thoughts are what seemingly convince us of many things, including the idea that there is a separate individual that resides in a body who has free will and is living a life full of ups and downs! So we are going to have a good look at thoughts.

Here is a thought exercise. Sit for about 30 minutes and notice the arising thoughts. Just let them appear as they appear and notice what the thought actually is - words, mental images, bits of music - whatever appears.

Try your best to COMPLETELY ignore what they are saying, and rather just notice how they appear, without you doing anything at all.

- 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?
- Where are they coming from?
- Where are they going?
- Can you predict your next thought?
- Can you push away any thought?
- Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts?
- Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle?
- Can you choose not to have painful or negative thoughts?
- Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?
- Is it possible to control any thoughts?
- Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Including the thought 'I'?
- It seems that thought has some logical ordered appearance, but look carefully and just notice if there is an organised sequence? Or is that just another thought that says ‘these thoughts are in sequence’ or “they take content from previous thought”, or that ‘one thought follows another thought’?

LOOK carefully when doing this exercise and do it a couple of times if necessary.

Cheers, Kay
xx

Good morning Kay, (don't know your timezone),
I wanted to reply and get some clarification about your last post.

Here is a thought exercise. Sit for about 30 minutes and notice the arising thoughts. Just let them appear as they appear and notice what the thought actually is - words, mental images, bits of music - whatever appears.

Try your best to COMPLETELY ignore what they are saying, and rather just notice how they appear, without you doing anything at all.

So I see that the instructions are to notice the arising thoughts without any attempt at manipulating them and just notice how they appear.

But in the questions you have put in blue there are a number of questions about pushing away thoughts, having different thoughts, etc.

- Can you push away any thought?
- Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts?
- Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle?
- Can you choose not to have painful or negative thoughts?
- Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?
- Is it possible to control any thoughts?
- Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Including the thought 'I'?

So when I follow the instructions and ] not try to manipulate thoughts in any way I would answer the questions one way. Thoughts just appear and disappear.

But since the questions ask if I can manipulate my thoughts I can address those issues. For example if I am thinking about something negative such as a bad day at work I can at some point say to myself that I would rather think about something else, a vacation for example, and dwell on more pleasant thoughts.
The questions about not having thoughts: I have some experience with using Mantras or watching the breath or body sensations and I have experienced some stopping or change in the thinking process.

So there is a bit of a disconnect between the instructions and the questions.

Again I understand the concept that thoughts just come and go and we don't have control over individual thoughts. They just pop up. But I do seem to have some control over a train of thought. "I am not happy with the election, I'll think about something else"

Hi Ken,

You are overthinking this! There are no right or wrong answers and there is no one here judging you on any answers given. There are no points given or taken away for answering these questions correctly or incorrectly! It's about you LOOKING to see what you see when doing the exercise. Questions and exercises are given as a means to ‘see’ and if what is being pointed at isn’t seen, then that is okay, as the pointing continues until it is. Seeing ALL thoughts as just appearing thoughts is a key element and to help see this is the thought exercise.

So, just follow the instructions. Just sit quietly and LOOK very carefully at ALL thoughts. For the first 5 minutes or so just watch the nature of thought as they come and go. Then when that is clearly seen, look to see if you can push away any thought and look carefully to see if this is possible or not. Then move onto the next question and watch ALL thoughts very carefully, as you move through the list of questions. You will either see it or you won't, but it doesn't matter, if you don't see, then more pointers will be given so that you get to see.

So when I follow the instructions and ] not try to manipulate thoughts in any way I would answer the questions one way. Thoughts just appear and disappear.

Great, so then sit and watch further with the intent to answer the next question in the list of questions given and so on.

But since the questions ask if I can manipulate my thoughts I can address those issues. For example if I am thinking about something negative such as a bad day at work I can at some point say to myself that I would rather think about something else, a vacation for example, and dwell on more pleasant thoughts.
The questions about not having thoughts: I have some experience with using Mantras or watching the breath or body sensations and I have experienced some stopping or change in the thinking process.

And I don’t want you addressing these issues, I want you to actually LOOK, and not conclude through thought, what you THINK you can do with thoughts.

Again I understand the concept that thoughts just come and go and we don't have control over individual thoughts. They just pop up. But I do seem to have some control over a train of thought. "I am not happy with the election, I'll think about something else"

And again, your understanding is not what I am asking for, I am asking you to LOOK and to answer the question from that perspective and not from thinking, which is just thoughts arising in the moment!

So, please sit and do the exercise. If you need to do it a few times, then so be it. As I said, this exploration isn’t about thinking, it is about LOOKING. And if you become frustrated with the exercise, and with LOOKING, just let me know and we can look at the frustration. Frustration is a sign of resistance and resistance is a sign of fear. So become aware of that also. And none of that is right or wrong, it is just what is appearing and we can look at this as it appears throughout this exploration, and this happens to everyone! So, it's about being open and honest and sharing what is coming up for you.

Kay
xx

Kay, Thank you let me give it a try

-

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

No they just appear

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

No
Don't know. Thoughts just come up.

- Where are they going?

Again , don't know they appear and disappear

Can you predict your next thought?

No. Trying to predict a thought would also be a thought.

- Can you push away any thought?

No, once it appears as a thought there it is. There can be attempt made to interrupt the thinking process but an individual thought will just pop up

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

No. An attempt can be made to steer thoughts toward pleasant thoughts

Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle?

Half a thought is still a thought so I would say no.

Can you choose not to have painful or negative thoughts?

No, they will arise anyway

- Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?

No really. I mean I can say to myself that I will spend the next ten minutes thinking about a certain subject and may or may not be able to stick with it but I don't think I would have any control over what any individual thought that pops up would be

- Is it possible to control any thoughts?

probably not, they would just come up

Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Including the thought 'I'?

No

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

Yes, I think that the thought that the thoughts are in sequence, etc. is just another thought. But like the question states it does sometimes "seem" that the thoughts are in sequence.

Hi Ken,

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

No
Don't know. Thoughts just come up.

So, let’s say that you tried to make a different thought appear instead of the thought that actually appeared…wouldn’t that just be another appearing thought saying that you made a different thought appear?


How is it known that the ‘different thought’ would be a different thought to the thought that actually appeared?

Can you predict your next thought?

No. Trying to predict a thought would also be a thought.

Yes exactly.

- Can you push away any thought?

No, once it appears as a thought there it is. There can be attempt made to interrupt the thinking process but an individual thought will just pop up

And is not “there can be attempt made to interrupt the thinking process but an individual thought will just pop up” just another appearing thought?

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

No. An attempt can be made to steer thoughts toward pleasant thoughts

Can it really? Please describe the process precisely on how an attempt can be made, without thought, to steer thoughts toward pleasant thoughts?

Can you stop thinking a thought in the middle?

Half a thought is still a thought so I would say no.

Where does a thought end and another begin and what determines is the 'middle' of a thought?

Can you choose not to have painful or negative thoughts?

No, they will arise anyway

Yes. And how is it known that thoughts are painful or negative? In other words, what determines that thoughts are painful, negative, fearful, peaceful, pleasant an so on?

- Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?

No really. I mean I can say to myself that I will spend the next ten minutes thinking about a certain subject and may or may not be able to stick with it but I don't think I would have any control over what any individual thought that pops up would be

Yes, and are those thoughts, the one's that you are saying to yourself, also just appearing thoughts? If so, are you actually thinking thoughts?

- Is it possible to control any thoughts?

probably not, they would just come up

Probably not? So did you actually LOOK to see if you could control any thoughts, or you just concluded this? And if you cannot pick and choose any kind of thought, then how can you possibly control any thoughts?

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

Yes, I think that the thought that the thoughts are in sequence, etc. is just another thought. But like the question states it does sometimes "seem" that the thoughts are in sequence.

I don't want you to think...I want you to LOOK!
And what is saying (ie how is it known) “it does sometimes “seem” that the thoughts are in sequence”? If I was to talk to you in a different language, how would it be known that what I am saying is in some logical, ordered sequence?

Oh, I forgot to answer re timezone. I live in Australia :)

Kay
xx

Hi Kay,
Ok let's refine this a little further, I'll take up your comments to my answers:

So, let’s say that you tried to make a different thought appear instead of the thought that actually appeared…wouldn’t that just be another appearing thought saying that you made a different thought appear?

Yes, I agree

How is it known that the ‘different thought’ would be a different thought to the thought that actually appeared?

There would be no way of knowing; it would just be another thought

And is not “there can be attempt made to interrupt the thinking process but an individual thought will just pop up” just another appearing thought?

Yes, this is clearer now. The attempt is just another thought.

Can it really? Please describe the process precisely on how an attempt can be made, without thought, to steer thoughts toward pleasant thoughts?

No, I can see that the "attempt" is just another thought

Where does a thought end and another begin and what determines is the 'middle' of a thought?

No argument here, I don't see how thoughts can be divided into parts

And how is it known that thoughts are painful or negative? In other words, what determines that thoughts are painful, negative, fearful, peaceful, pleasant an so on?

That determination would just be another thought. Body sensations may play a role(another thought)

No really. I mean I can say to myself that I will spend the next ten minutes thinking about a certain subject and may or may not be able to stick with it but I don't think I would have any control over what any individual thought that pops up would be


Yes, and are those thoughts, the one's that you are saying to yourself, also just appearing thoughts? If so, are you actually thinking thoughts?

Yes, I see what you mean. They are all thoughts.

- Is it possible to control any thoughts?

probably not, they would just come up

Probably not? So did you actually LOOK to see if you could control any thoughts, or you just concluded this? And if you cannot pick and choose any kind of thought, then how can you possibly control any thoughts?

Well, now I see that any attempt to control thought is just another thought

And what is saying (ie how is it known) “it does sometimes “seem” that the thoughts are in sequence”? If I was to talk to you in a different language, how would it be known that what I am saying is in some logical, ordered sequence?

It's another thought that says it. If I didn't know the other language I would not know what you are saying is in any sequence.

Oh, I forgot to answer re timezone. I live in Australia :)

So good morning to you! Also since you are in Australia you know what kind of bird a "budgie" is (my user name)

Ken

Hey Ken,

So now, be aware/notice of thoughts as they come and go and see them for what they are….just thoughts. Thoughts either point to AE or they point to more thought story. Don’t just give a tick to a task completed….it’s to continuously see thoughts for what they are….just thoughts appearing. Thoughts are AE and AE is everything except the "content" of thought, because thought does not contain ANY experience. If thought contained experience then the thought ‘hot’ would burn, and the thought ‘sweet’ would taste sweet!

So, let’s say that you tried to make a different thought appear instead of the thought that actually appeared…wouldn’t that just be another appearing thought saying that you made a different thought appear?

Yes, I agree

Great! Can an owner or author of thought be found anywhere?

How is it known that the ‘different thought’ would be a different thought to the thought that actually appeared?

There would be no way of knowing; it would just be another thought

Yes

And is not “there can be attempt made to interrupt the thinking process but an individual thought will just pop up” just another appearing thought?

Yes, this is clearer now. The attempt is just another thought.

Yes!

Can it really? Please describe the process precisely on how an attempt can be made, without thought, to steer thoughts toward pleasant thoughts?

No, I can see that the "attempt" is just another thought

Great! :)

And how is it known that thoughts are painful or negative? In other words, what determines that thoughts are painful, negative, fearful, peaceful, pleasant and so on?

That determination would just be another thought. Body sensations may play a role(another thought)

Yes, “body sensation may play a role” is just another thought.
Does a sensation suggest in any way that it is occurring in a body?
Does a sensation in any way suggest that it is pleasant or unpleasant?
Does a sensation suggest in any way that it knows anything about sensations or thoughts about pleasant or unpleasant?

No really. I mean I can say to myself that I will spend the next ten minutes thinking about a certain subject and may or may not be able to stick with it but I don't think I would have any control over what any individual thought that pops up would be

Yes, and are those thoughts, the one's that you are saying to yourself, also just appearing thoughts? If so, are you actually thinking thoughts?

Yes, I see what you mean. They are all thoughts.

Great! So, can a thinker of thought be found anywhere?

- Is it possible to control any thoughts?
probably not, they would just come up

Probably not? So did you actually LOOK to see if you could control any thoughts, or you just concluded this? And if you cannot pick and choose any kind of thought, then how can you possibly control any thoughts?

Well, now I see that any attempt to control thought is just another thought

Beautiful! This is a great thing to see! :)
Since there is no controller of thought, then what is it exactly that is responsible for what thoughts appear and what the thoughts are ‘saying’?

And what is saying (ie how is it known) “it does sometimes “seem” that the thoughts are in sequence”? If I was to talk to you in a different language, how would it be known that what I am saying is in some logical, ordered sequence?

It's another thought that says it. If I didn't know the other language I would not know what you are saying is in any sequence.

Yes! :) So, how is it known that problem solving happens in some sort of logical, ordered sequence? And is there anyone/anything that is actually problem solving?

Oh, I forgot to answer re timezone. I live in Australia :)
So good morning to you! Also since you are in Australia you know what kind of bird a "budgie" is (my user name)

I certainly do, there are many kept in cages! And there are also budgie smugglers swimwear! :)

There is a belief that labels have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’. But they don't. It is a generally accepted belief that labels like ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are inherent characteristics of ‘things’. But actually, they are not.

Here is an interesting exercise in how labels do not have a one-to-one correspondence with reality:

When you look at the word label ‘GREEN’, what is the actual experience?
Is the colour red experienced, or is the colour green experienced as the label suggests?
Do the labels have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’?
Or do the labels suggest something else other than what is here and now (red colour)?
Is green-ness inherent attributes of the experience of the colour red, or is green just a word label on the experience of the colour red?

If the label ‘GREEN’ is replaced with the label ‘GOOD’ or ‘BAD’, is the redness affected in any way as the labels suggests?
Does redness become ‘good’ or ‘bad’, or do the labels have no effect whatsoever on ‘reality’?

Cheers, Kay
xx

Hi Kay,

Can an owner or author of thought be found anywhere?

No

Does a sensation suggest in any way that it is occurring in a body?
Does a sensation in any way suggest that it is pleasant or unpleasant?
Does a sensation suggest in any way that it knows anything about sensations or thoughts about pleasant or unpleasant?

No there is just the thought. Thinking may label it but it too is just a thought. No on the third one.

So, can a thinker of thought be found anywhere?

No just the thoughts, no thinker

Well, now I see that any attempt to control thought is just another thought


Beautiful! This is a great thing to see! :)
Since there is no controller of thought, then what is it exactly that is responsible for what thoughts appear and what the thoughts are ‘saying’?

Nothing is responsible. The thoughts just appear and interpretations of what the thoughts are saying are just thoughts

So, how is it known that problem solving happens in some sort of logical, ordered sequence? And is there anyone/anything that is actually problem solving?

Well, if it was something like a math problem you could exam the steps of the problem to see if they happen in sequence but those thoughts would still be just thoughts without anyone problem solving

1 When you look at the word label ‘GREEN’, what is the actual experience?
2 Is the colour red experienced, or is the colour green experienced as the label suggests?
3 Do the labels have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’?
4 do the labels suggest something else other than what is here and now (red colour)?
5 Is green-ness inherent attributes of the experience of the colour red, or is green just a word label on the experience of the colour red?

6 If the label ‘GREEN’ is replaced with the label ‘GOOD’ or ‘BAD’, is the redness affected in any way as the labels suggests?
7 Does redness become ‘good’ or ‘bad’, or do the labels have no effect whatsoever on ‘reality’?

1 The label green is in red font and the experience is seeing a red word
2) The color red is experienced
3) No correspondence with reality, just words, thoughts
4) The labels are just labels that are seen
5) its just a word label on the experience of the color red
6 No
7 no effect on reality

Hi Ken,

Questions given are not just for answering. They do point, so it is up to you to contemplate what they are pointing to, more than just at the surface level. What you put into the LOOKING is what you get out of it!

Since there is no controller of thought, then what is it exactly that is responsible for what thoughts appear and what the thoughts are ‘saying’?

Nothing is responsible. The thoughts just appear and interpretations of what the thoughts are saying are just thoughts

Yes. There is no thinker of thought and thought just appears….so have a look what that really points to. What are the further implications of there being no thinker?

So, how is it known that problem solving happens in some sort of logical, ordered sequence? And is there anyone/anything that is actually problem solving?

Well, if it was something like a math problem you could exam the steps of the problem to see if they happen in sequence but those thoughts would still be just thoughts without anyone problem solving

What exactly is it that could “examine the steps of the problem to see if they happen in sequence”? There is no thinker of thought, so what could examine this?

1 When you look at the word label ‘GREEN’, what is the actual experience?
2 Is the colour red experienced, or is the colour green experienced as the label suggests?
3 Do the labels have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’?
4 do the labels suggest something else other than what is here and now (red colour)?
5 Is green-ness inherent attributes of the experience of the colour red, or is green just a word label on the experience of the colour red?
6 If the label ‘GREEN’ is replaced with the label ‘GOOD’ or ‘BAD’, is the redness affected in any way as the labels suggests?
7 Does redness become ‘good’ or ‘bad’, or do the labels have no effect whatsoever on ‘reality’?

1 The label green is in red font and the experience is seeing a red word
2) The color red is experienced
3) No correspondence with reality, just words, thoughts
4) The labels are just labels that are seen
5) its just a word label on the experience of the color red
6 No
7 no effect on reality

Yes, the questions are nicely answered, however do you really see what they are pointing to?


Kay
xx

Hi Ken,

How are you going with the extra LOOKING? What I wanted you to do was to LOOK deeper, and if you can't see what I am pointing to is to ask questions. It is from asking questions on what is being pointed to, or sharing what you are seeing or not seeing that really makes this exploration interesting and where discussion does arise and deeper pointing happens. If we keep it at surface level, then that is all that is seen, and it just remains as an intellectual understanding. And I, like you, would like for you to have the recognition that there is no such thing as a separate individual. Continuous seeking is the absolute pits and when this is seen it cannot be unseen and the seeking peters away.

So, let me know what is coming up for you. If there is anger, resistance, apathy, frustration, a shutting down, a dislike of me or whatever. If these are arising it is a good sign, and we can investigate these further in order to see what is behind them so that we can then move on in a productive way with this exploration.

Love, Kay
xx

Kay, no worries. I'll post more in an hour or two when I am at a desktop. Ken

Hi Kay,
I'll address some of the general issues in this post and then post again a bit later to answer the questions about "looking."

So, let me know what is coming up for you. If there is anger, resistance, apathy, frustration, a shutting down, a dislike of me or whatever. If these are arising it is a good sign, and we can investigate these further in order to see what is behind them so that we can then move on in a productive way with this exploration.

First of all don't worry about anger. I'm not one to use smiley face emoticons when I post but my general feeling is one of appreciation with working with you .

I think there is some frustration from a merely technical point of view. When I post at home I usually use this small Chromebook and it's a bit hard to go back and forth quoting individual questions, cutting and pasting and so on. Yesterday I lost some of what I was writing when a window shut down. I don't know if it might be easier to respond if you just post one or two questions in each of your posts. That way I would not be spending so much time quoting and I could more easily write a more considered answer.

I think I am getting more used to the approach used on Liberation Unleashed.

One frustration, I guess, is a certain amount of self editing I find myself doing because when I am answering a question using normal day to day speech (which seems to be asked for here) I am wary of saying "I think" or anything that seems to attach a story line to anything, because there is no self or if the answer to many questions is "it's just a thought" then it's hard to come up with something to say other than there is a moment to moment experience happening.

I'll post again a bit later and address some of the other questions and exercises. Ken

Hi Kay,

So this is a follow-up to my previous post in which I will address some of the questions I did not answer:

There is no thinker of thought and thought just appears….so have a look what that really points to. What are the further implications of there being no thinker?

This is a tough question. It would seem that to answer it would require some speculation and that would be more thinking. The general implication that comes to mind is that since experience is not happening to anybody that the experience of everything becomes a lot lighter and more spacious because there is no self that it is happening to. I realize that there may be a problem with the last sentence and you might say "to who is it becoming more spacious" etc. I would say that the experience is more spacious, because there is no one to experience it.

What exactly is it that could “examine the steps of the problem to see if they happen in sequence”? There is no thinker of thought, so what could examine this?

I understand that there is no "self" that can examine a math problem to see if each step is taken in a logical sequence but not sure how to expand on this idea

1 The label green is in red font and the experience is seeing a red word
2) The color red is experienced
3) No correspondence with reality, just words, thoughts
4) The labels are just labels that are seen
5) its just a word label on the experience of the color red
6 No
7 no effect on reality


Yes, the questions are nicely answered, however do you really see what they are pointing to

I think I get a glimmer. The exercise of seeing the word "Green" in Red font was a good way to show that language and labels are just a map. I understand that the map is not the territory.

Hi Ken,

Thanks for sharing all this with me...it clears the channels of communication :)

First of all don't worry about anger. I'm not one to use smiley face emoticons when I post but my general feeling is one of appreciation with working with you .

Anger is an indication of an underlying emotion eg fear, so if it appears it is because there is some resistance to this exploration, and it is good for me to know so we can have a look at what the resistance is. It could be a hidden expectation, or fear about you disappearing, fear about not seeing, fear about seeing and so on…so it’s good if we are both apprised of what is appearing for you :)

I think there is some frustration from a merely technical point of view. When I post at home I usually use this small Chromebook and it's a bit hard to go back and forth quoting individual questions, cutting and pasting and so on. Yesterday I lost some of what I was writing when a window shut down. I don't know if it might be easier to respond if you just post one or two questions in each of your posts. That way I would not be spending so much time quoting and I could more easily write a more considered answer.

Yes, that would be frustrating. I copy and paste the whole post into a Word document, write my responses, edit etc, then copy and paste the whole Word document onto the forum and then do the ‘quoting’.

But we can see how one or two questions go, if that makes it easier for you.

One frustration, I guess, is a certain amount of self editing I find myself doing because when I am answering a question using normal day to day speech (which seems to be asked for here) I am wary of saying "I think" or anything that seems to attach a story line to anything, because there is no self or if the answer to many questions is "it's just a thought" then it's hard to come up with something to say other than there is a moment to moment experience happening.

Yep, language is a bastard! :) When writing “I think”, I will question that to make sure that it is only being used as a communication tool and not a falling back into confusion! Instead of writing “I think”, perhaps “it seems” would be better as “seems” = thoughts, and that way I can see that you are referencing thought and not a person thinking! In the beginning I will question "it's just a thought" to ensure that LOOKING has taken place and it isn't just concluded. By constantly and continuously LOOKING, it becomes easier to LOOK. LOOKING does become automatic after awhile, but for it to become automatic, constant LOOKING must take place first!

Love, Kay
xx