The Gate

No problem, Sarah...thanks for letting me know :)

K

Hello Kay,

Thank you for your patience.

The face value of thought is actual experience (AE) and actual experience is everything, except the "content" of thought, because thought, in and of itself does not contain any experience, otherwise you would be able to hear the thought ‘thunder’, taste the thought ‘sweet’ and smell the thought ‘perfume’.

So, for example, “I am not good enough" is the thought. The ensuing thoughts of what that means is the content.

This is so interesting, I see this in the act of the thought, or in the moment of thinking, is the AE. All else related is the content and is not. Does that seem accurate?

There is no “I” to be “pulled back out of it into thought”, just as there is no control over what thoughts appear and when.

Yes, this is my sticky place. I understand the concept of no "I" yet I have difficulty seeing it. Or even if I begin to, the actual experience seems to dissolve back into this "me" persona that "I" have been carrying around for a long while. There is difficulty also with speaking about what I am experiencing without using the words "I", "me", "my", etc.

How is it known that there is a gap between thoughts…because a thought said so? Without thought, how would you know that a gap appeared?

This is funny...yes, without thoughts you wouldn't know that a gap appeared! That is quite right! So, are we ALWAYS thinking? It seems we must be. When I think I am not thinking, I am really just thinking about not thinking. I do really wish there was an off button....this all just seems so draining, thinking ALL the time!

What about when we sleep? Deep sleep? Dreamless sleep? Are we not thinking then?

Observe thought closely when you can throughout your
day. Try to determine what your next thought is going to be before it appears. Can you do this?

No, this cannot be done. The thoughts just come. There is no control over them, including no anticipation of what they will be. Simply because the anticipation IS the thought as it is presented. If I had a thought before it came to me, then that would be the thought. There is no before...only now. AE.

Thank you so much, Kay!

Lovingly,
Sarah

Hey Sarah,

So, for example, “I am not good enough" is the thought. The ensuing thoughts of what that means is the content.

This is so interesting, I see this in the act of the thought, or in the moment of thinking, is the AE. All else related is the content and is not. Does that seem accurate?

I am not sure what you mean, Sarah.

‘Thinking’ is just a succession of thoughts, linked by another thought. And the content of thought is more thoughts about thoughts.

Just like the apple. The label apple is the thought, the content of the thoughts ABOUT an apple is that it is sweet, sort of round, can be red or green, grows on a tree, can be used in salads or eaten on its own. These are all thoughts ABOUT an apple…they are the content that makes up the story (thoughts) about apples.

If you were to read the book titled “How to grow apples” (main thought), the entire content of the book is based on thoughts ABOUT growing apples.
Does this make it clearer?

There is no “I” to be “pulled back out of it into thought”, just as there is no control over what thoughts appear and when.

Yes, this is my sticky place. I understand the concept of no "I" yet I have difficulty seeing it. Or even if I begin to, the actual experience seems to dissolve back into this "me" persona that "I" have been carrying around for a long while. There is difficulty also with speaking about what I am experiencing without using the words "I", "me", "my", etc.

Because you don’t actually see it, it is a realisation…like an aha moment. It’s not as if the “I” disappears.

There have never been an “I” – a separate self. The idea of being separate self and the thoughts ABOUT ‘me’, ‘I’ etc have always appeared…..so why would that change? The difference is, is that a realisation happens but the idea of a separate self and the “I” thoughts don’t disappear, but there is a knowing that these concepts are not true.

How is it known that there is a gap between thoughts…because a thought said so? Without thought, how would you know that a gap appeared?

This is funny...yes, without thoughts you wouldn't know that a gap appeared! That is quite right! So, are we ALWAYS thinking? It seems we must be. When I think I am not thinking, I am really just thinking about not thinking. I do really wish there was an off button....this all just seems so draining, thinking ALL the time!

And can you see that “I do really wish there was an off button....this all just seems so draining, thinking ALL the time!”, is also just an appearing thought. However, does it mean that the thought belongs to a ‘me’ or even refers to an actual ‘me’ or are they only thoughts ABOUT a ‘me’? ('Me' being the thought and every thought that makes up a me, is the content of the thought 'me').

What about when we sleep? Deep sleep? Dreamless sleep? Are we not thinking then?

These questions are for another forum once realisation of no self has happened. This exploration is about seeing what you are not. Once you have ‘gated’ you can always ask for further guidance to go through these and other questions like these.

Observe thought closely when you can throughout your
day. Try to determine what your next thought is going to be before it appears. Can you do this?

No, this cannot be done. The thoughts just come. There is no control over them, including no anticipation of what they will be. Simply because the anticipation IS the thought as it is presented. If I had a thought before it came to me, then that would be the thought. There is no before...only now. AE.

Lovely LOOKING, Sarah….good job!

Once again, observing thoughts closely when you can throughout your day:-

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

Love, Kay

Good morning Kay,

Does this make it clearer?

Yes, I clearly see this.

The difference is, is that a realisation happens but the idea of a separate self and the “I” thoughts don’t disappear, but there is a knowing that these concepts are not true.

Yes, this I conceptually understand this, but I do not see it yet. I suppose in time I will.

And can you see that “I do really wish there was an off button....this all just seems so draining, thinking ALL the time!”, is also just an appearing thought. However, does it mean that the thought belongs to a ‘me’ or even refers to an actual ‘me’ or are they only thoughts ABOUT a ‘me’? ('Me' being the thought and every thought that makes up a me, is the content of the thought 'me').

Yes, I understand the concept that this is just a thought appearing with content. I think I need to spend some time on it however. I certainly don't see this yet.

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

Well, thoughts just happen. "I" do not control thoughts coming in, and just the same, I could not make a different thought appear instead of the one that did.

Thank you, Kay.

Lovingly,
Sarah

Hey Sarah,

The difference is, is that a realisation happens but the idea of a separate self and the “I” thoughts don’t disappear, but there is a knowing that these concepts are not true.

Yes, this I conceptually understand this, but I do not see it yet. I suppose in time I will.

Even when seeing happens….doubts and confusion will still appear as there is a yo-yoing which happens. This can happen for some time, so if you are expecting that once seeing has taken place that everything will always remain 100% clear…it is an expectation that will not be realised! As I wrote in the post in our beginning posts…seeing through the self is a beginning and not an ending.

And can you see that “I do really wish there was an off button....this all just seems so draining, thinking ALL the time!”, is also just an appearing thought. However, does it mean that the thought belongs to a ‘me’ or even refers to an actual ‘me’ or are they only thoughts ABOUT a ‘me’? ('Me' being the thought and every thought that makes up a me, is the content of the thought 'me').

Yes, I understand the concept that this is just a thought appearing with content. I think I need to spend some time on it however. I certainly don't see this yet.

We have only just begun our exploration, so it is not surprising you don't see it yet! :) Conceptual understanding is generally needed before the aha moment appears! However, this exploration is just a beginning and not an ending. There will still be beliefs and patterns that are rooted in the idea of being a separate self that will need clearing, as not everything gets rewritten in one big hit. The core belief of being a separate self is seen through, however, like a rug that is beginning to unravel, there are still many knots that need undoing. But if you know that the ‘conditioning’ is not something that you own, then it is easier to clear. Continuing to LOOK after the realisation is very much the key.

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

Well, thoughts just happen. "I" do not control thoughts coming in, and just the same, I could not make a different thought appear instead of the one that did.

Lovely!

Since you are doing so well with thoughts, I will give you the remaining questions.

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
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 choose not to have painful or negative thoughts?
Is it possible to control any thoughts?
Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Including the thought 'I'?
Is it possible to hold more than one thought at a time?

Love, Kay

Hello Kay,

Where are they coming from and going to

They seem to be coming from nowhere and then disappear to nowhere. Just floating in and out.

Can you predict your next thought?

No, the next thought can not be predicted. I mean, if I had the thought that I was predicting a thought, the act of predicting it would be the thought arising. And this, I have no control over.

Can you push away any thought?

No, other thoughts may arise to replace it, even thoughts of pushing away, but it is clear that they just arise and pass. I am not doing anything. In fact, if I was to experience thoughts of pushing away a disturbing current thought, most likely, or what I have experienced before, is that the disturbing thought would arise even more because of the arising thoughts of NOT wanting it to be there.

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

No, thoughts just arise and pass. I may have a thought that arises that I have a choice, but this is simply a thought. I can not actually choose. The thoughts that accompany this thought of choosing are ones that arise on their own. "I" am not doing anything.

Can you choose not to have painful or negative thoughts?

No, just the same, they just arise and pass. I have experienced that depending on the way I respond or react to these thoughts arising (i.e. positive) will cause other similar thoughts (i.e. positive) to arise. All the same, I have no control or choice over how I respond or react. I may think I do, but this is just a thought arising which I have no control over. So ultimately, no control over any if it.

Is it possible to control any thoughts?

No, as mentioned above, there is no control over thoughts.

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

No, "I" have no control over this. Everything is "I" in "my" thinking. There is no getting away from it.

Is it possible to hold more than one thought at a time?

No, this is impossible. Only one thought at a time.

Thank you so much for your guidance, Kay!

With love,
Sarah

Hey Sarah,

Lovely LOOKING!

So, it is clear that there is no thinker/author of thought and there is no controller or chooser of any thought?


When doing the following exercise, keep in mind what we have explored so far – AE and thought.

Find a TV team sport on TV or a Youtube clip that lasts for at least 5 minutes. The following link is to a game of soccer, but if you prefer another sport…please feel free to find one to do this exercise with.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTPxORAlT0Y

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 what you notice when you turn the sound on and off.
Without thought, what is actually appearing/happening ie what is the actual experience of what seems to be 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?

Love, Kay

Hello Kay,

So, it is clear that there is no thinker/author of thought and there is no controller or chooser of any thought?

Yes, this is clear. This is what I see. This is what is experienced.

Let me know what you notice when you turn the sound on and off.
Without thought, what is actually appearing/happening ie what is the actual experience of what seems to be happening etc?

When the sound is off, colors are experienced moving about. That is all.

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?

No, the commentary is not necessary for the football game to happen. Not for the players, and not for the watchers. As in life, this inner commentary is not necessary at all. It all works just the same. Colors just moving about, doing. In AE, nothing else is needed.

Thank you, Kay.

Lovingly,
Sarah

Hi Sarah,

So, it is clear that there is no thinker/author of thought and there is no controller or chooser of any thought?

Yes, this is clear. This is what I see. This is what is experienced.

Wonderful! :)

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?

No, the commentary is not necessary for the football game to happen. Not for the players, and not for the watchers. As in life, this inner commentary is not necessary at all. It all works just the same. Colors just moving about, doing. In AE, nothing else is needed.

Yes, exactly. Life happens with or without thought!

So, see how thought seems to be the predominant experience, however, if you just allow (watch/observe) thought without actually following thought, you see that thought is just a constant stream of commentary that has a story about everything, and how it overlays actual experience continuously with stories. Can you see how thought does the same with the colour labelled ‘Sarah’ and ‘her life’?

Did you happen to notice how the muted video left you rather neutral towards the apparent happenings on screen, while the commentary version of the game kind of sucked you into the story that the commentator was telling? And that the muted watching was more about the current action whilst the commentator was mostly referring to what just happened or what might happen. So this is how it goes with the story about a character called ‘Sarah’!

So let’s continue looking at the idea of control, choice and decision making

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

Hello Kay,

Can you see how thought does the same with the colour labelled ‘Sarah’ and ‘her life’?

mostly referring to what just happened or what might happen. So this is how it goes with the story about a character called ‘Sarah’!

Yes! I see this! A consistent flow of thoughts, of stories. I have been observing this for sometime and questioning the stories. Or should I say, observing that they are stories that make up this color 'Sarah'.

How is the movement controlled?

Does a thought control it?

I am not sure how it is controlled, but I do know that thought is not controlling it. Meaning, not conscious thought. I do not experience the thought 'turn over hand' arising and passing.

Can a ‘controller’ of any description be located?

No, I can not locate a controller of the hand turning over.

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.

Yes, this is what happens. The hand continues turning over but as soon as I have the THOUGHT to turn over the hand it does do it immediately! Although this immediate movement is driven by thought, the consistent movement is not. I know this because the hand continues to move while unrelated thoughts arise and pass. And, since only one thought can happen at a time, these unrelated thoughts that are arising and passing would not be able to IF the hand movement was controlled by the thought 'turn over'.

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

No, I can not find this.

Okay, I'm ready....what is going on? What is controlling this movement of the hand. Of all movements?

Thank you, Kay.

Lovingly,
Sarah

Hi Sarah,

Nice LOOKING, Sarah! :)

Can you see how thought does the same with the colour labelled ‘Sarah’ and ‘her life’?
mostly referring to what just happened or what might happen. So this is how it goes with the story about a character called ‘Sarah’!

Yes! I see this! A consistent flow of thoughts, of stories. I have been observing this for sometime and questioning the stories. Or should I say, observing that they are stories that make up this color 'Sarah'.

That is great….keep it up! :)

How is the movement controlled?
Does a thought control it?

I am not sure how it is controlled, but I do know that thought is not controlling it. Meaning, not conscious thought. I do not experience the thought 'turn over hand' arising and passing.

What is the AE of conscious and unconscious?
If the thought “turn over hand” is not known to you in that moment, then where exactly would it be hidden?


It’s like old age philosophical question, "If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?”
What sound and what tree? If they are not in direct experience, then where is this tree and where is the sound?

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.

Yes, this is what happens. The hand continues turning over but as soon as I have the THOUGHT to turn over the hand it does do it immediately! Although this immediate movement is driven by thought, the consistent movement is not. I know this because the hand continues to move while unrelated thoughts arise and pass. And, since only one thought can happen at a time, these unrelated thoughts that are arising and passing would not be able to IF the hand movement was controlled by the thought 'turn over'.

If the hand turning is driven by the thought “turn hand over”, why then, when that thought appears, that the hand does not always turn? And your great observation that that without that thought hand continues to move when other thoughts appear. If it needed the thought “turn over hand” to activate the movement, then the hand, even logically would stop moving!

Have you ever found yourself scratching some part of the body without you actually making the ‘conscious’ decision to do so…but you only noticed you were scratching the body…after the scratching had already started? If thought drives the action…where was the thought to do it? You would have had to be aware of the thought that told the hand to scratch the body,.

Okay, I'm ready....what is going on? What is controlling this movement of the hand. Of all movements?

Can you find anyone or anything that is controlling the movement…or is the movement just happening?

We can check this another way.

All you need is 20 minutes, a pen and paper.

First write what you are experiencing right now using words “I” and “me”. Get right to the point, no past or future fantasy, just plain description of here now.

Like this-
I am laying in bed.
I am hearing the rain,
I am typing these words,
I am thinking

Do it for 10 minutes. Watch the body; are there any sensations of tightening or relaxing?

Then for next 10 minutes write without words “I” and “me”. Just describe the experience as it is happening using verbs:

Typing, breathing, blinking, hearing rain, writing, thinking

Again watch what is happening in the body.

Does what is happening need the label (thought) “I” for it to happen, or does it just happen?

When comparing the two ways to label experience- is one truer than the other? If so, which one? What is here without labels? Do labels affect the experience or just describe it?

Love, Kay

Hello Kay,

I apologize for taking so long with this. I will be able to answer it fully within the next day.

Lovingly,
Sarah

Hi Kay,

What is the AE of conscious and unconscious?
If the thought “turn over hand” is not known to you in that moment, then where exactly would it be hidden?

I think by saying consciousness I meant AE, and by unconscious I meant automatic. I suppose there is in some way belief of having "control" over AE but not over automatic. In this way, it seems that with AE I am participating and with automatic functions I am not.

So, it doesn't really seem that the automatic functions are hidden, more so that they just happen. Just as with thoughts arise and pass, so do these functions. The AE is seeing it all happening. I don't mean to go in another direction with this, but I hope I am conveying my AE if this clearly.

Can you find anyone or anything that is controlling the movement…or is the movement just happening?

Movement just happens.

Does what is happening need the label (thought) “I” for it to happen, or does it just happen?

No, it just happens.

When comparing the two ways to label experience- is one truer than the other? If so, which one? What is here without labels? Do labels affect the experience or just describe it?

In truth, this idea is the reason why LU seemed to be the next step for me. These labels of "I", "me", "mine" just don't seem fitting. And, after doing this experiment, I can conclude that yes, listing just what is AE without the label is truth. The other doesn't feel so right at all. Everything just IS without labels and no, labels do not affect the experience at all. As my 6 year old so intuitively said the other day "Nothing has a name, mommy. Names are just made up."

Thank you, Kay!

Lovingly,
Sarah

Good morning Sarah,

What is the AE of conscious and unconscious?
If the thought “turn over hand” is not known to you in that moment, then where exactly would it be hidden?

I think by saying consciousness I meant AE, and by unconscious I meant automatic. I suppose there is in some way belief of having "control" over AE but not over automatic. In this way, it seems that with AE I am participating and with automatic functions I am not.

Great for you to see this idea that there is a you who has control over AE!

Can you find AE and not AE? Does not actual experience occur/happen by itself? Can you make a sound appear when you want it to appear, or make a sound leave when you want it to leave, or a sensation, or a thought, or a colour etc?
Everything that appears is AE, even the thought stories are AE because they are AE of thought.

Thoughts either point to AE or they point to thoughts about thought. So in that sense, not everything is a story. It looks like it could be until you look a little closer.
Sound labelled "tweet" isn't story, but story can say that a blue bird down the street made that sound.
Flavour labelled "sweet" isn't a story, but story can be, "I love chocolate ice cream."
Colour (image) isn't story, but thought could say, "Wow! What a spectacular sunset!"
Now, if image labelled "sunset," isn't experience as you presently find it to be, then it IS story.
And the story itself is AE of thought which is experience as you presently find it.
See the difference?

The content of the words ‘conscious’ and ‘unconscious’ don’t point to anything but thought. So the words and the content of those words/thoughts, which is further thought, are AE of thought.

So, it doesn't really seem that the automatic functions are hidden, more so that they just happen. Just as with thoughts arise and pass, so do these functions. The AE is seeing it all happening. I don't mean to go in another direction with this, but I hope I am conveying my AE if this clearly.

What do you mean when you say “The AE is seeing it all happening”?
Can colour see? Can smell see? Can taste see? Can sensation see? Can thought see? Can sound see?

When comparing the two ways to label experience- is one truer than the other? If so, which one? What is here without labels? Do labels affect the experience or just describe it?

Everything just IS without labels and no, labels do not affect the experience at all. As my 6 year old so intuitively said the other day "Nothing has a name, mommy. Names are just made up."

Clever girl! :)

Let’s do another exercise on seeing if thought affects experience.

Here is a great exercise in showing 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’?

Love, Kay

Hello Kay,

Can you find AE and not AE? Does not actual experience occur/happen by itself?

No, AE is all there is. Whatever it is that my attention is on is what I am experiencing, be it colours, smells, sounds, sensations, thoughts, even thoughts of thoughts. There is only AE.

Can you make a sound appear when you want it to appear, or make a sound leave when you want it to leave, or a sensation, or a thought, or a colour etc?

Besides the sound of my own voice, no. No, I cannot make any of these appear or leave upon my own wanting.

Everything that appears is AE, even the thought stories are AE because they are AE of thought.

See the difference?

Yes, I understand this fully.

What do you mean when you say “The AE is seeing it all happening”?
Can colour see? Can smell see? Can taste see? Can sensation see? Can thought see? Can sound see?

No, I just mean that I am experiencing it, witnessing it, or observing it.

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?

The colour red is experienced. The colour is more prominent than the label, even though when thought is experienced about the colour green it doesn't match up with the AE of seeing it.

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)?

No, labels definitely do not have a one on one correspondence with reality. They certainly suggest something different then what is here and now, what is AE.

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?

Yes, it is just a word label on this 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’?

No, the labels have absolutely no effect on reality or AE. What a wonderful perspective on all AE!

Thank you, Kay.

Lovingly,
Sarah