The Gate

Going back to the question - what could possible identify with...?

Remember the hint: we rarely question the perception of identification.

A Zen master would look at identification and non-identification and just piss herself laughing.

I explored my own perception of identification yesterday and saw that in direct experience, all you can really say is that there is perception and there are sensations that go along with perceiving. Thoughts may appear about what one is identified with but you can't actually tie that to direct experience. Identification itself is just a concept or story from the mind.

It really makes you wonder about what other stories you're just assuming to be true, without realizing you're assuming (thus they stay invisible).

It seems a breakthrough on my end though it leaves me at the opposite conclusion of the original quote: identifying with nothing rather than everything since I now see any identification as just belief.

Thanks as always,
Brent

I explored my own perception of identification yesterday and saw that in direct experience, all you can really say is that there is perception and there are sensations that go along with perceiving. Thoughts may appear about what one is identified with but you can't actually tie that to direct experience. Identification itself is just a concept or story from the mind.

Yep. And it drops away as having any relevance.
You might notice how much the mere existence of identification is treasured.
For then we are placed, and not adrift. :D - from the perspective of self-image/self.

It really makes you wonder about what other stories you're just assuming to be true, without realizing you're assuming (thus they stay invisible).

Indeed. For a period, my favourite question was: what am I presupposing here and not noticing?

It seems a breakthrough on my end though it leaves me at the opposite conclusion of the original quote: identifying with nothing rather than everything since I now see any identification as just belief.

Yeah, its a moot point. very zen. what was a thing burns away like mist on a summer morning.

And what is that like, for identification to go up in thin air?

Best wishes,
Johnb

You might notice how much the mere existence of identification is treasured.
For then we are placed, and not adrift. :D - from the perspective of self-image/self.

Beautifully said. As adrift is normally understood to mean lost and without guidance... instead of free!

For a period, my favourite question was: what am I presupposing here and not noticing?

I am curious how long this lasted for you. This is very timely and rhymes with other guidance I've heard that goes something like: "You've been told by numerous teachers that you're already free, and that you're just not noticing it - that you are holding the cage door shut. Don't put your mind into the future about how one day you might get there, keep working on yourself, meditating, etc. There must be something right now you're assuming to be true that isn't. Look into your experience right now to figure out what that is. Don't wait for some day in the future. It will never come. "

And what is that like, for identification to go up in thin air?

It is freeing. I can feel the mind wanting to pull me back, just a little. It felt this way the first couple of days after seeing through the observer and then it fell away after checking with direct experience a few more times just to make sure the same conclusion was reached. I think the same will be the case here too. It's probably just healthy skepticism.

John, you've helped me enormously and I don't want to take advantage (too much!) of your hospitality. Is this the point where I explore the remainder myself or am I confusing graduating 4th grade from graduating college? :)

Brent

For a period, my favourite question was: what am I presupposing here and not noticing?

I am curious how long this lasted for you.

It was an intense question that helped me tremendously, going back several years now. Probably for a few months.
It may have followed on from: what if everything I had believed to be true, wasn't. :D
Although, its a handy question to have in lots of situations, not just inquiry.

And what is that like, for identification to go up in thin air?

It is freeing. I can feel the mind wanting to pull me back, just a little. It felt this way the first couple of days after seeing through the observer and then it fell away after checking with direct experience a few more times just to make sure the same conclusion was reached. I think the same will be the case here too. It's probably just healthy skepticism.

Cool.
As opposed to that unhealthy skepticism. :)

John, you've helped me enormously and I don't want to take advantage (too much!) of your hospitality. Is this the point where I explore the remainder myself or am I confusing graduating 4th grade from graduating college? :)

Well, if you can give me a big fat yes :) that you have seen clearly and cleanly through this conditioned 'self' as an inherent entity that thinks :) and so on, then we can explore some wrap-up questions, to see if there's any loose ends.

Many thanks!
John

It may have followed on from: what if everything I had believed to be true, wasn't. :D
Although, its a handy question to have in lots of situations, not just inquiry.

Love it. I often ask myself that very question in my work - rarely about daily life experience though.

Well, if you can give me a big fat yes :) that you have seen clearly and cleanly through this conditioned 'self' as an inherent entity that thinks :) and so on, then we can explore some wrap-up questions, to see if there's any loose ends.

I honestly don't know how to answer. I mean, I think so...? It's the "clearly and cleanly" part I hesitate on. In comparing my own "seeing" to others' descriptions, theirs often sound like a sort of unmistakeable, nonverbal experience. Like someone hands you a picture of an African landscape and says "There's a cheetah in this picture. His camouflage is working very well, but... do you see it?" And you look and look and look. Nothing. Suddenly it pops out. Obvious. There it is!! You can't un-see it after that.

Mine feels to be more a conclusion reached through logic and some checking with my actual life experience, but not a significant experience per se. I feel like Socrates to their David Carse, if you know what I mean.

Are we talking about an unmistakeable experience or a conclusion that can be sometimes here, sometimes forgotten (like if the environment grows stressful or I get too little sleep).

With appreciation,
Brent

Well, if you can give me a big fat yes :) that you have seen clearly and cleanly through this conditioned 'self' as an inherent entity that thinks :) and so on, then we can explore some wrap-up questions, to see if there's any loose ends.

I honestly don't know how to answer. I mean, I think so...? It's the "clearly and cleanly" part I hesitate on.

That's a no then. :)

In comparing my own "seeing" to others' descriptions, theirs often sound like a sort of unmistakeable, nonverbal experience. Like someone hands you a picture of an African landscape and says "There's a cheetah in this picture. His camouflage is working very well, but... do you see it?" And you look and look and look. Nothing. Suddenly it pops out. Obvious. There it is!! You can't un-see it after that.

Well, it does vary a lot.

Mine feels to be more a conclusion reached through logic and some checking with my actual life experience, but not a significant experience per se. I feel like Socrates to their David Carse, if you know what I mean.

Are we talking about an unmistakeable experience or a conclusion that can be sometimes here, sometimes forgotten (like if the environment grows stressful or I get too little sleep).

To be plain, it is an internal inquiry in which you inquire into what you thought to be the ground of 'me', the social persona, a character named 'Brent' running the show - and the working assumption that this is who I am: 'me'. Basically, the state of most folk you meet in daily life.

And in inquiring directly, you see there is no ground to it, it, 'me' ,'brent', has no place to stand.

It drops out.

That.

That's a no then. :)

Siiiiiiiiiiiiiigh.

And in inquiring directly, you see there is no ground to it, it, 'me' ,'brent', has no place to stand.

It drops out.

Honestly I don't want to waste your time, I just don't know how high of a bar to have for the "seeing" experience and having had "it" drop out.

I don't recall any profound "seeing" experience but likewise I don't see myself as any sort of character. It's either because I've seen through it OR I've studied nonduality so long that I've replaced the belief in a character with a belief in no-self. Either way, there's nothing to explore if I'm asked to look deeply into the Brent character I assume myself to be because there isn't such an assumption.

With nothing "poking the animal" there is peace and just looking inside. However, if someone is rude, it'll often make me mad and defensive. Not forever, but for a while. If I'm walking in a dangerous neighborhood, my guard is up, my adrenaline is pumping, and I'm nervous - not peacefully no-thing, just walking.

Is that hopelessly hoping for levitation and perfection or is that a sign of a lack of thorough seeing?! I really don't know.

Feel free to just tell me to take some months off and cook a while. I know your time isn't unlimited!

Thank you,
Brent

Honestly I don't want to waste your time, I just don't know how high of a bar to have for the "seeing" experience and having had "it" drop out.

If I had time, I'd waste it all on you. :)

I don't recall any profound "seeing" experience but likewise I don't see myself as any sort of character. It's either because I've seen through it OR I've studied nonduality so long that I've replaced the belief in a character with a belief in no-self. Either way, there's nothing to explore if I'm asked to look deeply into the Brent character I assume myself to be because there isn't such an assumption.

All of that is possible, and more.

So, what rubbed up against 'clearly and cleanly'? I have no idea what that means by the way, 'clearly and cleanly'.

With nothing "poking the animal" there is peace and just looking inside. However, if someone is rude, it'll often make me mad and defensive. Not forever, but for a while. If I'm walking in a dangerous neighborhood, my guard is up, my adrenaline is pumping, and I'm nervous - not peacefully no-thing, just walking.

Being a zombie isn't the bar being set. :D

Is that hopelessly hoping for levitation and perfection or is that a sign of a lack of thorough seeing?! I really don't know.

Put it this way, is anything missing?

Many thanks!
John

If I had time, I'd waste it all on you. :)

Too kind!!

So, what rubbed up against 'clearly and cleanly'?

This took a loooong time but I think I can finally verbalize it. I realized that I have to do inquiry but make myself answer quickly - from the viscera - before the mind can edit it. Like this:

Are you a character in this body? Brent, with his story, character traits, etc.
No

Are you sure?
100%.

So then there's literally nobody home?
Ummm....

What?!
There could be something more subtle home.

Like a soul or a spirit?
I don't really like those words. Too religious. But something like that.

An independent presence?
Yes.

Why would you think that?
Because it feels like I have free will, at least partly. I don't choose what thoughts appear to me but I do choose whether or not to act and how, as far as I can tell. At least when I'm paying attention.

Doesn't thought drive action?
Not completely. When deciding whether to act on something the mind gives me the options and the pros and cons of each. But it feels like I weigh those, viscerally, and choose which one.

Can you find a do-er when you look?
No but that doesn't satisfy. If I'm it, I'm not going to be able to find it.

Let's get this straight. What's the probability that Santa Claus exists?
100% doesn't exist.

Do you ever think, maybe you should have some healthy skepticism and keep an open mind... like maybe only 99% chance he doesn't exist?
No, never. Barring my being insane and not knowing it, 100% doesn't exist. I never struggle with it, never question it.

Here's a nice necklace with a Christian cross. What's the probability this will protect you from danger?
100% no protection.

You're about to go skydiving. Are you sure you don't want to wear it?!
I'm sure.

So what's the probability that some independent, subtle YOU doesn't exist?
I'm pretty convinced, but... 85%.

What would get you to 100%?
Well some mystical experience would be nice but I'm not holding my breath. I'm clear I don't make my thoughts but I guess I would have to have a similar confidence that I don't have free will. I know I don't have 100% free will, but I'm not clear it's 0%. If I'm clear on no control of thoughts nor actions, what else is there?!

Well some mystical experience would be nice but I'm not holding my breath. I'm clear I don't make my thoughts but I guess I would have to have a similar confidence that I don't have free will. I know I don't have 100% free will, but I'm not clear it's 0%. If I'm clear on no control of thoughts nor actions, what else is there?!

Ok, thanks for laying that out. What we're looking at here are two distinct aspects: 'self' ('Brent' character) - which you have seen 100% you are not - and being, the sense of presence.

Now, it is a 'self' that conventionally we deem to be the one with free will, the one responsible, the one who makes decisions. As 'self' is unequivocally seen as a fiction, then all these functions - capacities of 'self' - fall away too. Seen as fictional capacities of a fictional 'self'.

Agree so far? :)

And then there is a felt sense of presence that has nothing to do with 'self' at all.
It is a presence that feels to have agency - to do stuff. To go here, rather than there.
At the same time, many things are given - light, air, bad rock music, thoughts.

Now, this area of free will is hugely messy, and subtle, and dogged by dogma.
There will be folk reading this, who think you have ditched 'Brent' and fallen into being a presence.
Shelved a little-i for a BIG-I. :)
Depending on the context of their own seeing, it may be interpreted as a proxy-self/identity.
But my sense from you is that this is not the case.

So, we are in the realm of being, and whilst the realm of 'self' is fairly easily defined, the realm of being is wide and deep and long.

Put a right hand, palm-down, on the thigh.
In a moment, it will lift to eye-level. But not yet.
If you 'tell it' to lift, it won't.
If a voice-in-the-head says 'lift', it won't.

When that hand starts to lift, see if you can track the initiation of the lifting.
What was the trigger? The initiating factor?

And what stopped it lifting with precision?

Share any discoveries.

Many thanks!
John

Now, it is a 'self' that conventionally we deem to be the one with free will, the one responsible, the one who makes decisions. As 'self' is unequivocally seen as a fiction, then all these functions - capacities of 'self' - fall away too. Seen as fictional capacities of a fictional 'self'.

Agree so far? :)

Yes!

So, we are in the realm of being, and whilst the realm of 'self' is fairly easily defined, the realm of being is wide and deep and long.

The good thing is I don't think I have much book-learning here to lead the witness, as it were.

Put a right hand, palm-down, on the thigh.
In a moment, it will lift to eye-level. But not yet.
If you 'tell it' to lift, it won't.
If a voice-in-the-head says 'lift', it won't.

When that hand starts to lift, see if you can track the initiation of the lifting.
What was the trigger? The initiating factor?

And what stopped it lifting with precision?

First, I want to make sure I'm doing this right. The point was to intentionally lift the hand and see how this is accomplished, right? (Not to plant the suggestion and then wait until I'm distracted daydreaming or something, then suddenly notice it lifted on its own).

If I intend that I'm going to lift the hand, and then do it quickly (within a second or two), there was nothing I could discover. Thought doesn't appear to be involved - there's just a nonverbal, internal, subtle intention and the arm just lifts and stops where it's supposed to. I have no idea how I lift the hand or do pretty much anything physically. Out walking the dog yesterday I continually asked, "how am I moving these legs right now?!" and just came up with nothing.

I then tried slowing things down. I sit still. I intend I'm going to lift the hand but give myself 20-30 seconds to really tune in and bring attention to the body first. While just sitting still there is this pleasurable electric current sensation that is felt throughout and around the whole body. It's pleasurable almost to the point of being uncomfortable if I really bring my attention to it.

A few seconds before lifting the attention goes mostly from the whole body to just the arm and the electric sensation is felt around the arm (almost like a full arm cast) and the palm begins to glow more with sensation. The arm feels heavy and the hand lifts. It stops at the right place - I don't know how!

I repeated this many times and it felt like in my effort to discover how I was lifting the hand I was just getting deeper and deeper into a rabbit hole of feeling what physical sensations are associated with its happening and away from the point of the exercise (i.e. how do you initiate lifting your hand?)

The TL; DR is I have no idea how I initiate it, but I certainly feel like I cause it through some subtle, unspoken, un-thought intention.

With appreciation,
Brent

First, I want to make sure I'm doing this right. The point was to intentionally lift the hand and see how this is accomplished, right? (Not to plant the suggestion and then wait until I'm distracted daydreaming or something, then suddenly notice it lifted on its own).

Observation. And the development of observation to see what can be observed and what can't be observed.

If I intend that I'm going to lift the hand, and then do it quickly (within a second or two), there was nothing I could discover. Thought doesn't appear to be involved - there's just a nonverbal, internal, subtle intention and the arm just lifts and stops where it's supposed to. I have no idea how I lift the hand or do pretty much anything physically. Out walking the dog yesterday I continually asked, "how am I moving these legs right now?!" and just came up with nothing.

Well, you're calling it 'intention' which is understandable, but at this level, we're observing, non-verbally - seeing, sensing, feeling, intuiting. As you say, you came up with nothing. Which just means, given the way you observed, nothing significant was observed in respect of being involved or initiating movement.

I then tried slowing things down. I sit still. I intend I'm going to lift the hand but give myself 20-30 seconds to really tune in and bring attention to the body first. While just sitting still there is this pleasurable electric current sensation that is felt throughout and around the whole body. It's pleasurable almost to the point of being uncomfortable if I really bring my attention to it.

Ok, when you use the word 'intend', observe what happens, in contrast to moments prior, when you might say there was no intending.

A few seconds before lifting the attention goes mostly from the whole body to just the arm and the electric sensation is felt around the arm (almost like a full arm cast) and the palm begins to glow more with sensation. The arm feels heavy and the hand lifts. It stops at the right place - I don't know how!

Good observing.

I repeated this many times and it felt like in my effort to discover how I was lifting the hand I was just getting deeper and deeper into a rabbit hole of feeling what physical sensations are associated with its happening and away from the point of the exercise (i.e. how do you initiate lifting your hand?)

Perhaps all we can say following such observation is an arm can be lifted with precision at any time, and were there to be a means whereby that is initiated, it is not observable.

Maybe it's Brent? :)


Best wishes,
John

Maybe it's Brent? :)

Oh, stop! :P

Perhaps all we can say following such observation is an arm can be lifted with precision at any time, and were there to be a means whereby that is initiated, it is not observable.

Couldn't have said it better. One thing started bothering me though. I've repeated this experiment several times over the last couple of days and each time I'm going about daily life when my brain says "hey, let's try the hand experiment again." So you could argue that a thought is what ultimately leads to lifting the hand (maybe just not immediately). And as I've said I don't control my thoughts, then I don't control when I do the experiment, so technically I don't control when I lift the hand.

Ok, when you use the word 'intend', observe what happens, in contrast to moments prior, when you might say there was no intending.

I've been looking at this very closely because I started suspecting that what I called "intending" was actually a short thought too (e.g. "lift now"). That's definitely the case at least sometimes. I can feel my mind wanting to be done with this exercise and therefore make the leap that a thought always proceeds the action, and I'm not in control of thoughts so I'm not in control of action. No free will. Done. Next question!

Viscerally, I haven't quite proved it to myself fully yet. I'm playing around with this with a variety of action I believe "I" cause in daily life to see if I can find an exception to the hypothesis. Obviously the actions I do on autopilot don't count (they happen without "intention").

Feels like I'm on to something but let me know if I'm going off in the weeds!
Brent

Viscerally, I haven't quite proved it to myself fully yet. I'm playing around with this with a variety of action I believe "I" cause in daily life to see if I can find an exception to the hypothesis. Obviously the actions I do on autopilot don't count (they happen without "intention").

Feels like I'm on to something but let me know if I'm going off in the weeds!

Sure, let's play HUNT THE EXCEPTION! :)

Honestly, the lengths we go to to not give shit up. :D

Have fun. :)
John

Honestly, the lengths we go to to not give shit up. :D

OK, your gentle (!) nudging here helped.

When first encountered, the idea of "no free will" rubs one the wrong way because it's interpreted to mean no choice. But "we" apparently make choices all the time. I'm on an airline and they give me a choice of chicken or fish. Now, I like fish but right now I'm not in the mood for it, so I pick chicken. See, there's free will! I'm not a robot!

But... what picked what "I" was in the mood for? Did an "I" choose the mood?

It's more accurate to say that if there's an I, it is just observing choice operating. "I" never pick my preferences in music, food, people, sexual orientation, etc. The preferences are just there, from genetics, past experience, conditioning, etc. A situation where choice is required appears, options are weighed via feeling preferences (which I don't choose) or thinking (with thoughts I don't create), and a choice is made. Actually, no I is required.

It feels dangerous to throw out the "I" but there's a way to tiptoe in. You can say "Only for the next hour, I'm going to live as if there's no I, and see if everything falls apart". And it doesn't. And actually, life is easier and there's just less "friction" during that hour. So you decide to try it for another hour...

So, does the hand lift when "I" intend it to? No. You sit there and at some point an impulse appears that now is the time to lift (via a thought or feeling, doesn't matter) and you lift it then. It feels like free will because you can lift when the impulse strikes. But ultimately, YOU don't pick when the impulse strikes.''

"No free will" sounds miserable when first encountered, because it's interpreted to mean you couldn't satisfy your impulses. Actually it just means you don't create the impulses, the preferences that determine the response to them, nor the time when they appear.

That's where I'm at today.
Brent