The Gate

Hi Andrew,

I can't deny that I'm experiencing a spastic and discouraging contraction, but I'm continuing to look as you suggest between the thoughts that seemingly pull my attention. I can feel the doubt and confusion and remember your suggestion that it is a bit of a leap of faith. But in the midst of this contraction that faith does not come easily, especially after "seeing" so many times and still somehow apparently being subject to these cycles. I am definitely tossing on the waves of thought/feeling at the moment... but I will continue to look as you suggest whenever I'm able.

Thanks for your patience Andrew.

Hi Gattaca,

I can't deny that I'm experiencing a spastic and discouraging contraction, but I'm continuing to look as you suggest between the thoughts that seemingly pull my attention. I can feel the doubt and confusion and remember your suggestion that it is a bit of a leap of faith. But in the midst of this contraction that faith does not come easily, especially after "seeing" so many times and still somehow apparently being subject to these cycles. I am definitely tossing on the waves of thought/feeling at the moment... but I will continue to look as you suggest whenever I'm able.

Well, see discouragement arising. Why shouldn't it arise? It's easy to take refuge in our thoughts, to believe them as 'real'. The mind thinks, 'Well if I'm having this thought there must be some basis for it. There must be a 'real' cause.' And so we look and we're fooled into thinking these thoughts matter because when they arise we want to believe in them. We're concerned there's something behind them, some cause.

But is the silence between thought less real, more real?

The little leap of faith I mentioned is just a small step to look and say, 'What will happen if I don't believe in it? What will happen if a thought arises, a feeling and I just look at it?' We can choose to be in the seeing, see what comes up, we don't have to believe in anything. We can let that belief go, let it all go.

So maybe you have a 'cycle' where you see and accept what is without resistance and another 'cycle' where a thought or a feeling arises and you react - 'Oh! I can't ignore that, it might be important.'

Well, it's important if you make it important. It matters if it matters to you. But if you're tired of it, sick of it and you want to let it all go and let the 'phone ring' when emotions or thoughts arise you can choose that too. Why? Because it's all just happening subjectively to 'you', it's not 'real' - never was. All just thoughts and feelings.

So there are two sides to this equation if you like, or two qualities that will lead to freedom. The first is the letting go, the lack of desire to be trapped round and round in these thoughts that come up, over and over for us. We follow them, it doesn't work, we try to shut them up it doesn't work, so in the end we just see them and say, 'Okay, just this, just a thought.'

The second is direct experience. Being in the now, fully in the present with just what is. Where we see all just is as it is, it is this way. If we bring thought to it, it's just a thought, not real. So our attention isn't trapped by thoughts, by feelings and we just see.

When you have your eyes closed, and you turn around and then open them, see what happens. What is the exact sequence of events that happens. If you're very alert from waking up in the morning you can try it then too. Have a go and look at how the experience develops and let me know what you find.

Best wishes,

Andrew

Hi Andrew,

I'm surpised at how today there is (seemingly without effort on my part) more space than yesterday. I'm finding it fascinating how communication around this occurs, and feel that I am coming to greater understanding of what might be termed "transmission". The ability to even "hear" your words seems so dependent on the degree of belief in the thoughts at the time. For example in a moment of deep identification the pointings you offer are so easiliy deflected and dismissed. Try as I might to access their intent, there is only frustration ("I know that! Give me something more!") like a petulant child. The intent of the suggestions is all but inaccessible. But now with more space I feel able to consider them more deeply.

It brings to mind what you mentioned before...

Don't know if you plan on doing any reading this weekend but now you may find the writings of some teachers look different than before.

Indeed I did poke at some writings when all was clear and instead of sounding mystical and abstract (as they typically do through the filter of thought) it was seen that these authors were speaking quite literally and matter of factly.

I know this may seem like a useless commentary but I feel there is some lesson in here for myself (or perhaps others than might happen on this post). Resonant understanding ("Transmission"?) seems to occur in inverse relationship to the belief that thought/feeling points to anything beyond itself. I recognize this is no great insight, but still helpful for me to recognize in moments of confusion.

That digression aside... Thank you for your pointers. I'll conisder them tonight and keep you posted.

Many Thanks Andrew

Hi Gattaca,

For example in a moment of deep identification the pointings you offer are so easiliy deflected and dismissed. Try as I might to access their intent, there is only frustration ("I know that! Give me something more!") like a petulant child.

Lol, yes we all have had that at times, 'Just tell me the answer!' But of course there's nothing to tell. Like me trying to tell you about your invisible apple.

I know this may seem like a useless commentary but I feel there is some lesson in here for myself (or perhaps others than might happen on this post). Resonant understanding ("Transmission"?) seems to occur in inverse relationship to the belief that thought/feeling points to anything beyond itself. I recognize this is no great insight, but still helpful for me to recognize in moments of confusion.

No insight is useless, the truth is very simple - if the truth isn't simply what is then what could it be? Would it make sense for it to be anything else?

The thinking mind is a useful tool and can be highly developed but watch closely how you relate to it. Like the glass that's already broken...

In direct experience, with no thought, no arising of the sense of 'I' we find a natural state. This is not hard to access and what needs to be added to it? Any reason not to walk through that door, to simply be?

Best wishes,

Andrew

Hi Gattaca,

Is there an expectation that awakening will/should be some sort of event or perhaps an ending?

Is there an expectation that with awakening a thought of 'self' won't ever arise again? Whether awakening has occurred or not we can all still end up taking a seat on the 'thought train'.

It's easy to have a head full of ideas about what awakening should be based on accounts of others or our own remembered experiences. But that's not now is it? What's seen now? What's the direct experience?

Have a look at this and let me know.

Take care,

Andrew

The thinking mind is a useful tool and can be highly developed but watch closely how you relate to it. Like the glass that's already broken...

Yes, I think I have a better sense of what the oscillation is about, at least this last one. In that place of awakeness thoughts would come as usual, including thoughts of "Yes, it's over. I get it!" Mostly I was able to see these thoughts arise and was able to see the mechanism in play... not identify or believe that the thoughts referred to anything. But (my sense is anyway that) this excitement/pride/vanity movement continued and eventually it was bought into at some level. Indeed I feel that I did come to relate to the thoughts and the thinking mind as referring to this "person who got it".

I mentioned in the beginning of this thread one of my expectations...

I'll be recognized by others as somehow special and my sense of never being good enough will be a thing of the past.

I'm realizing now that this hope/expectation may stand head and shoulders above any others. I feel I have done much to shed this pattern. I no longer move through the world telling myself I'm not good enough. But I sense that that pattern is still running. I see it most strongly in the vain compensating thoughts that arise in concert with this seeing. There is an upwelling of satisfaction, peace, and confidence that is general so foreign to the pattern that has running for the past 40 years of my life that I think it is difficult not to "adhere" to it. As i mentioned before there was a lot of crying associated with realizing that "I" can never get this, or anything that I've ever longed for... apparently there is still desire/hope that the "I" can derive benefit from this.

This is not hard to access and what needs to be added to it? Any reason not to walk through that door, to simply be?

The reason not to walk through that door is that there is still some lingering belief that I can make it... that I can attain this rare and beautiful jewel and it will somehow give meaning to the decades of loneliness, angst, misery, and suffering I've endured. No matter the situation where I might consider myself inadequate to others or my own expectations I could put my hand in my pocket and secretly fondle this priceless jewel with an inward smirk knowing that it's not me that is "less than". It's sick, the height of ego, and I'm often surprised and disgusted by it, but it's true. I'm even aware that there is disappointment in me as I see how popular the teachings of non-duality have become! "If when I become enlightened I don't want there to be a bunch of other awakened people diluting my market share! How will people find MY website if everyone and their grandmother becomes awakened and hangs out a shingle?!" And thoughts of judgement towards whatever paths are similar to the one I'm on. Significantly different paths (e.g. Christianity) pose no threat... but the closer the path is to my own (e.g. Buddhism/non-attachment) the more thoughts appear to denigrate it, differentiate from it, so that "MY path" can remain on the throne. I realize now how the Jed McKenna books are a constant source of fuel and satisfaction for this pattern of thinking. The truth in his words is unmistakable, but he is continually setting himself apart and above the rest of the ignorant masses. My ego loves that... eats it up. "Oh you meditate you poor sap... nah, I follow Jed's teachings, all that crap is beneath me." I abhor these thoughts in there grossest form, but they don't always take such a recognizable shape and they can still catch me. With this latest seeing the grossly egotistical thoughts were easily detected and seen as empty... but the excited sense that I might be able to "show" something of this to my girlfriend, or another friend found it's way in. I feel like if/when seeing happens again I should lock myself away for a year. I think there was also an intuition happening when I stepped away from answering "the final questions". Indeed I think that may have trigger this last contraction. That false self was so eager to get the gold star that it muscled in to awareness and wanted to take over.

Is there an expectation that awakening will/should be some sort of event or perhaps an ending?

The main ("shadow") expectation is what I described above... the being "above it all" and all that. But in my defense I have to say there is a lucid part of me that knows that's all total nonsense. But I can't deny those thoughts occur with a regularity thats more than comfortable.

Is there an expectation that with awakening a thought of 'self' won't ever arise again?

My "lucid" expectation is only based on what I experienced during the last period of seeing. Namely that thoughts of self appeared but they had such an obvious quality that I could not be hooked into believing that they referred to any independent entity.

What's seen now? What's the direct experience?

What was seen is not gone. It is clear whenever I look that there is no identity to be found and this seems to result in a general background sense of ease. The thoughts of trying to grasp this understanding for the benefit of a self seem relatively quiet at this moment. There is a noticing that this experience doesn't share the "depth" of the previous experience of seeing, so there is a slight movement of longing/hope/expectation.

When you say that even after awakening there can be rides on the thought train... do those rides include any sense of identity? If so, is it just instantly seen through when attention comes to it? That was my memory of the dynamic during my "periods of seeing".

Thank you Andrew. Also, I'm very grateful for the questions. The narrative/pointers are very welcome as well but the questions really force me to focus my attention in a different way.

Hi Gattaca,

I'm realizing now that this hope/expectation may stand head and shoulders above any others. I feel I have done much to shed this pattern. I no longer move through the world telling myself I'm not good enough. But I sense that that pattern is still running. I see it most strongly in the vain compensating thoughts that arise in concert with this seeing. There is an upwelling of satisfaction, peace, and confidence that is general so foreign to the pattern that has running for the past 40 years of my life that I think it is difficult not to "adhere" to it. As i mentioned before there was a lot of crying associated with realizing that "I" can never get this, or anything that I've ever longed for... apparently there is still desire/hope that the "I" can derive benefit from this.

There's no value in judging hopes and expectations - they are what the are. I still live in hope that one day I'll meet Liv Tyler and we'll fall madly in love (my partner is very patient of this :)

When a pattern of thought arises, it has a cause. It might not be important, and I don't always do so, but you can look and see the cause. Every bad choice or decision you ever made was the 'right choice' at the time for a whole variety of reasons. Even the judgement now that says, 'I need to shed this pattern', can be seen with, 'Yes, I see where that feeling comes from, that's okay.'

It's sick, the height of ego, and I'm often surprised and disgusted by it, but it's true. I'm even aware that there is disappointment in me as I see how popular the teachings of non-duality have become!

Look at all of the 'self' judgement going on here. But what's to judge? Why judge? Patterns happen, these thoughts happen, they might even continue to happen for years! Is it a problem? Well, I don't know, is it a problem?

There's no 'state' to attain, and of course no 'jewel'. Keep the stereogram 'magic eye' picture in mind - it's just a seeing. It's possible to see and tell no-one, ever, just get on with life like the hundreds of others who have seen. It won't pay your bills or solve all of the issues in your life content, but with no sense of 'I' what do these issues mean?

The main ("shadow") expectation is what I described above... the being "above it all" and all that. But in my defense I have to say there is a lucid part of me that knows that's all total nonsense. But I can't deny those thoughts occur with a regularity thats more than comfortable.

Okay, and would you like to escape those thoughts? Why? What possible harm can a thought do if it's not believed in?

But look again at the sentence you wrote - there's a lot of 'i' and 'me' going on. 'My' defense? Do 'you' need a defense? Who is this 'I' that needs one? Is he a freind of 'yours'? :)

When you say that even after awakening there can be rides on the thought train... do those rides include any sense of identity? If so, is it just instantly seen through when attention comes to it? That was my memory of the dynamic during my "periods of seeing".

Yes, we can all get swept up in the narrative of life - it's all around us after all, along with everyone not awake. So at times it's bought into, negative or identified thoughts can and do arise. But then there is seeing and in direct experience it's just a thought. What does it mean? Who is it happening to? All seen in a moment and the illusion vanishes again. Underneath there's an ease because we've seen through. - But no-one's ever asked me for my autograph for seeing it ;)

Best wishes,

Andrew

Hi Andrew,

Sorry for the delay. I'll get back tonight with an update.

Many Thanks,

Hi Andrew, Sorry for the delay. I'll check in tonight.

What possible harm can a thought do if it's not believed in?

Yes, this seems to be the heart of the matter. Taking whatever thoughts indicate as a valid, existing representation of a reality "somewhere".

I feel as though that powerful stream of I/me thoughts has effectively passed, however I am aware of an expectation perhaps you could help with.

There was that brief period a week (or so) ago when it was felt that everything was seen quite clearly, and there was an attendant serenity, peace, etc. that seemed unshakable. Then of course the "I" thoughts were believed and there was the experience of great suffering, doubt, and confusion that appeared to obscure what was seen. Seeing, or even looking, seemed an impossibility. There is definitely an expectation that this obscuration should not occur after the "I" is seen through. I understand that all manner of thoughts and feelings may persist but my expectation (based on experience of "periods" of awakening) is that these movements would just appear dancing insignificantly and to no effect in emptiness. My memory is that, with no one to take delivery of them, thoughts would appear virtually DOA and disappear just as quickly.

Even as I type this I'm aware that from this side of the gate questions such as these make sense and from the other side they simply don't apply. So I'm forced to realize that I'm just pointed outward in the mind seeking answers when there are not really any to be had. And again the question disappears in the ether when it's not thought into existence.

I like your question...

Any reason to not walk through the door?

Whenever considered it illuminates what's left that is believed in. And when whatever belief/expectation is seen as a somehow voluntary movement it (by some mysterious mechanism) seems to relax on it's own.

I'm feeling that the "I" has lost a lot of ground here. What I'm considering this "subtle I" now is really just thought. I don't feel any strong sense of identity associated with the thoughts, but I do notice that I am seeing the thoughts as discrete "things", somehow independent of the rest of the appearance. And as I sit here in Starbucks typing I notice that when I consider whether that distinction is really there, the boundary around the thoughts appear to blur into all else that appears. Is a thought really separate from the appearance of the wall of coffee mugs in front of me? Or the cops seated around the table across from me?

I'm seeing that separating and labeling experience in terms of thoughts, feelings, appearances etc. while helpful for the sake of communication creates subtle boundaries where there are none, reinforcing a subtle sense of separation. Even though I may feel confident in asserting there is no "I" there is that sense which perhaps arise from not having clearly seen through this dynamic.

Even now I sense a movement to turn this into a practice "Is there truly a separation between thoughts, feelings, and all else that appears in experience?" There is a thought "Maybe this is the final key!" and with the attraction to this thought an artificial boundary is somehow spun around it. "What is attracted to this thought?" appears... just another thought, made real only by taking there to be something it is actually calling for or represents.

Thank you Andrew.

Hi Gattaca,

Yes, this seems to be the heart of the matter. Taking whatever thoughts indicate as a valid, existing representation of a reality "somewhere".

Lol, perfect. You've hit the nail on the head. We do and they don't!

I feel as though that powerful stream of I/me thoughts has effectively passed, however I am aware of an expectation perhaps you could help with.

There was that brief period a week (or so) ago when it was felt that everything was seen quite clearly, and there was an attendant serenity, peace, etc. that seemed unshakable. Then of course the "I" thoughts were believed and there was the experience of great suffering, doubt, and confusion that appeared to obscure what was seen. Seeing, or even looking, seemed an impossibility. There is definitely an expectation that this obscuration should not occur after the "I" is seen through. I understand that all manner of thoughts and feelings may persist but my expectation (based on experience of "periods" of awakening) is that these movements would just appear dancing insignificantly and to no effect in emptiness. My memory is that, with no one to take delivery of them, thoughts would appear virtually DOA and disappear just as quickly.

Okay, so this is seen as an expectation, and you've identified the culprit 'believed'. As well as bringing expectation and belief to this you're also bringing 'memory'. Ask yourself this, where is reality? In your head? In my head? In a thought or a memory or belief? Can it ever be here?

When we go through life like this we end up like one of those tourists who don't really remember their holiday because they saw it all through a camera lens, instead of simply being their and soaking up the experience.

Just be in the now. When thought arises, any thought, just have the faith and the confidence to be in the now. There's no need to rely on thought because... there's no-one who needs that. It's fine to just be. And the more you practice just being, the more space you'll find and freedom and the less real these thoughts will seem.

Suffering over a thought is like suffering over losing a sword in WoW (sorry if you don't get that reference). It's not real, never was. So why suffer?

But also watch the expectation not to have expectations - I'm not being funny, but as soon as you offer resistance to what arises, that's the hook.

Whenever considered it illuminates what's left that is believed in. And when whatever belief/expectation is seen as a somehow voluntary movement it (by some mysterious mechanism) seems to relax on it's own.

Okay but watch the 'voluntary movement'. Ask yourself, who controls this? Where is the controller?

I'm feeling that the "I" has lost a lot of ground here. What I'm considering this "subtle I" now is really just thought.

There is no 'I'. It's as real as the apple - absolutely not more so.

I do notice that I am seeing the thoughts as discrete "things", somehow independent of the rest of the appearance. And as I sit here in Starbucks typing I notice that when I consider whether that distinction is really there, the boundary around the thoughts appear to blur into all else that appears. Is a thought really separate from the appearance of the wall of coffee mugs in front of me? Or the cops seated around the table across from me?

Watch all these thoughts and see them as they are - all just thoughts, there's no reality in any of them. When you look out at the sea which wave is more important? Which is the significant wave?

I'm seeing that separating and labeling experience in terms of thoughts, feelings, appearances etc. while helpful for the sake of communication creates subtle boundaries where there are none, reinforcing a subtle sense of separation. Even though I may feel confident in asserting there is no "I" there is that sense which perhaps arise from not having clearly seen through this dynamic.

Okay, let's consider belief and thought. Picture this, you're 1000 feet up on a bridge over a gorge and your bungee jumping instructor tells you you're all strapped and in and it's safe to step off. The thought is you understanding his words and accepting the sense of them. That's not belief - belief is why in that moment you're still sh*t scared, why that fear arises, the heart beats faster, adrenaline pumps etc.

Thinking there's no 'I' has little meaning, anyone can consider this and might believe it to be true. But to believe it, to step out of the nice safe comfort zone of 'I' and just be in the moment without attaching to any of it. That's a letting go on a different scale. But why not step through that door...? You've been down every other road a thousand times before..

Now it might come gradually or suddenly - both happen and no telling which, but when it does and as it does, resist nothing.

Best wishes,

Andrew

Hi Andrew,

I felt moved to answer the questions...

1) Is there a 'me' or 'you' or 'I' , at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form? Was there ever? Can there ever be?

If you could say that there is anything at all, there is only movement within - or better "as" - this experiencing. There may be the movement of an "I" thought or feeling but this alone offers no evidence of any "I". Similarly all manner of thoughts and feelings seem to indicate independent objects or entities in their own right. However on investigation these references are not found to indicate anything outside their own transient appearance.

2) When you say "I", what in Experience are you referring to?

This "I" cannot be distinguished from the experiencing itself. There is no argument for any localization of anything (an independent identity) within the experience. When I say "I", I can't say that I'm referring to anything in particular in the experience. If the question is referring to conventional communication, "I" could be said to refer to an artificially divided aspect of the appearance... an "appearance within the appearance" that has a quality of familiarity compared to say objects in the visual field which fluctuate immediately with a slight turn of the head. But this description is provisional. When someone wakes from a dream they must speak of themselves as having a vantage point within the dream knowing that such a vantage point does not in any way represent an actual physical location within the dream (which is know to have taken place only "in consciousness"). The awakened dreamer in trying to communicate the dream to others must use provisional language referring to time sequence, relative location, activities within the dream etc. simultaneously knowing that all appeared within "his/her" consciousness.

3) In Experience, is there an experiencer? Is it the body that experiences or is the body simply an experience?

No experiencer but only experiencing. Within the experiencing might arise various sensations that are commonly given the label of "body" but this is an artificial distinction, a concession made for the sake of communcation.

4) Explain in detail what the illusion of separate self is, when it starts and how it works.

It appears only with the reference to it, but even then it only "seems" to appear. Like the imaginary apple you describe to me in your hand, you suggest the notion of it, then you can refer to it, tell a story about how it grew from some seed somewhere, was transported by some fruit truck to some store that you got it from and now here it is in your hand. But did the imaginary apple ever actually originate ("when it starts")? Does something non-existent have any principles of operation ("how it works")? In this way the illusion of the separate self could be said to originate only with the suggestion of it. Just as the suggestion of an imaginary apple might appear, the suggestion of a separate self might appear. The suggestion in the case of a separate self may appear very convincing until seen through. But on direct examination, as with the apple, it is seen that it was never there... so no "starting" nor "workings" apply.

5) How does it FEEL to See? describe in detail.

It feels as though there is no separation... a seamless indivisibility. It does not feel static. It feels that what is, is merely this appearance of timeless arising/falling. It could be called "emptiness" to indicate that nothing within it arises to any level of becoming such that it could constitute a "thing". It could be called "fullness" to indicate nothing arises "outside" of it. It feels that whatever is seen is what is, nothing more or less, nothing an indication or suggestion of anything else. No "now" suggesting a "later", no "here" implying a "there". With no reference point, nothing stands opposed. With no self, there is no other... no outside would to manage or defend against. With no question taken to be legitimate there is no doubt.

6) How would you describe it to somebody who has never heard about this illusion but is curious about it?

There would probably be an inclination to avoid the topic unless it was clear that the curiosity was genuine and there was some natural "opening" there. Assuming this opening was intuited to be there I'd suggest that the person consider whether or not the "I" they take themselves to be really exists and to look for it to see if it can be found in direct experience. If the "I" truly can never be located in direct experience what are the implications? What beliefs/thoughts/feelings remain that substantiate and continue to give legitimacy to this "I" that is seen in direct experience not to exist? Is it true that they necessarily imply an "I"? Why or why not?

7) What was the last bit that pushed you over or made you look? was there a specific moment when seeing happened or was it gradual?

I can't say that there was anything in particular that pushed me over or made me look. I would answer that if there is seeing, by definition you could say, it can only be immediate as with the seeing comes the realization that the notion of "progression", levels, etc. don't really apply... or if they do they apply only within the dreamstate. That said, the experience was that there were multiple "openings" to this truth, typically followed by experiences of intense seeking to "regain" what was realized. In past weeks the beliefs that have previously given legitimacy to this notion of "I" have, under consideration, given way to recognition. Experiences with a quality of "I" may continue, but as belief in what is referred to is discounted in direct experience, what issue arises?

8) Now that you see that 'you', the first person character at the core of life, isn't, what do you see when you see 'others'? Explain in your own words from your direct experience.

Without an "I" the distinction between self and other cannot stand. The typical judgements of self in relation to others (or self in relation to self for that matter) seem to be appearing less and when they do they seem to fall away quickly. There appears an impersonal automatic quality to the way others appear as if there is nothing animating them, and this gives rise to a certain sense of wonder or awe. It's very much like (if not identical to) becoming lucid in a dream and realizing that all of these appearances (including the so called people in the dream) are actually animated by (or rather again "as") a single consciousness.

Thank you Andrew. Clarifications, comments, follow up questions are most welcome as usual...

Hi Gattaca,

Thanks for that. Can't help but notice you've slipped into a very formal style of writing for these answers, a bit like you're writing your MA dissertation :)

It suits me, I like it. It's the style I usually try to write in - nice, formal, clear. Probably the outcome of too many years trying to impress examiners with our concise ratiocination. I especially like your answer to no. 5 - beautifully expressed.

I guess my only question relates to your answer to question 1. and I'd like to ask - so, do you feel the illusion of 'I' is now fully seen through? When you say:

There may be the movement of an "I" thought or feeling but this alone offers no evidence of any "I".

Has the illusion of 'self' been realised? I ask because the thinking mind can see evidence in this way one day, but can then subtly turn it around to look another way another day. But like the bungee jumping analogy, belief we're not going to die only happens once we've done it a few times and we know. So would you say it is now known there is no 'I' in direct experience or does it still have the flavour of simply being a clear thought that there is no 'I'?

Do you have anything you'd like to add about this investigation?

Best wishes,

Andrew

Can't help but notice you've slipped into a very formal style of writing for these answers, a bit like you're writing your MA dissertation :) It suits me, I like it. It's the style I usually try to write in - nice, formal, clear. Probably the outcome of too many years trying to impress examiners with our concise ratiocination.

Yes, I think you may have hit the nail on the head there! I notice it too. I believe the fact of it being "under review" definitely contributed to the more academic tone. Aside from that I generally seem to come more from a "truth" place than a "heart" place.

I'd like to ask - so, do you feel the illusion of 'I' is now fully seen through? When you say:<br /><br />

gattaca wrote:<br />There may be the movement of an "I" thought or feeling but this alone offers no evidence of any "I".

<br /><br />Has the illusion of 'self' been realised? I ask because the thinking mind can see evidence in this way one day, but can then subtly turn it around to look another way another day.

Certainly a fair question, most especially given this cycle of seeing/not-seeing. All I feel I can say in this regard is that following each "contraction" there has been clearer understanding. The thoughts that hook me into believing them ("e.g. "I got it!") appear more noticeable allowing them to come to attention sooner. As usual, from this place of seeing it is not seen how belief in the "I" could reconstitute. But I've said that before! I sense now a humility surrounding this. It would not be true to say that I have 100% confidence that the sense of "I" can no longer assert itself and that a sense of identification will never arise. But from here now I know that were this to occur it could only be an illusion.

But like the bungee jumping analogy, <b><i>belief</i></b> we're not going to die only happens once we've done it a few times and we <b>know</b>. So would you say it is now <b>known</b> there is no 'I' in direct experience or does it still have the flavour of simply being a clear thought that there is no 'I'?

I very much like this analogy as it describes my experience so well. I had fear, I jumped, I saw the truth that I was safe. But on the second jump there was still that doubt, I jumped and again saw the truth that I was safe. I'm getting the sense that even though that fear arises (in this case the thought that this seeing will not persist) it is known on a deeper level (yes much deeper than thought) that the truth has been seen. I have no doubt that the "I" will reassert itself vigorously at some point (probably soon as my ex-girlfriend is arriving tonight for a week-long visit!) But I know that whatever appears - even the illusion of strong identification - that this is the ground within which all must come to rest.

Do you have anything you'd like to add about this investigation?

I don't think so... unless there was something specific you wanted to know (were you meaning a general reflection on the process?).

One curious thing... I find that I'm more inclined to unabashedly people watch. This includes women judged to attractive (Liv Tyler is quite beautiful by the way... but my ideal is Jennifer Connelly). Whereas before I would be afraid and immediately look in another direction if they noticed me, I find that now if they look in my direction it takes me more than a moment to even realize that there's someone here looking! This of course results in a perhaps socially unacceptable period of staring that may get me into trouble some day... or into a relationship.

Sincerest thanks Andrew.

ps. By the way, yes I got the WoW reference. :) I'm a PS3 guy myself... very much enjoying the new Tomb Raider starring (fellow Brit) Lara Croft.

Hi Gattaca,

Thanks for that. Lol, I get the staring thing but for me it happens more with silences - I don't notice 'awkward' silences easily any more.

Well, as is customary I'll take your answers to the other guides and see what questions they come back with. As for this week - just see it as an excellent opportunity to see what arises in experience.

Best wishes,

Andrew