The Gate

Hi Henrik,

i can not really understand how there can be an experience without an experiencer

Remember that we are not trying to understand but to see directly... if you find yourself straining to understand, stop, relax, and start again when you are ready to look at what is indicated with fresh, innocent eyes

Let's come back to what you wrote earlier:

I still feel stuck in the sense there is an "I" that experience my awareness

Let's look at 'my' a little ... 'me' and 'mine' are very closely bound up with each other

Look at your hand .... is it a hand, or 'my hand'? Can you experience attitude at will? What changes between these two experiences?

How about your computer screen .... a screen, or 'my screen'? Can you switch between them? How are the two attitudes different?

How about the floor, the sky?

Please take a bit of time over the above before moving on ... whereas conceptual understanding can happen at the speed of reading, exploring experiences carefully takes rather longer.

So now, what about 'awareness' and 'my awareness'? Are these different experiences? Does the way you LABEL the raw experience CHANGE the overall experience?

x
Perry

Hi Perry,

I actually replied yesterday but can not see my post so now i try again.

Remember that we are not trying to understand but to see directly... if you find yourself straining to understand, stop, relax, and start again when you are ready to look at what is indicated with fresh, innocent eyes

Yes what i mean is that i can not see it.

Look at your hand .... is it a hand, or 'my hand'? Can you experience attitude at will? What changes between these two experiences?

The difference between "a hand" and "my hand" is that my hand is controlled by my body which my awareness is connected to.

How about your computer screen .... a screen, or 'my screen'? Can you switch between them? How are the two attitudes different?

Same here. "I" or my body have control over my computer screen. I can sell it or use it how i want.

How about the floor, the sky?

Same with the floor, if its part of my apartment.

For the sky, no its not mine because by body don't control it.

So now, what about 'awareness' and 'my awareness'? Are these different experiences? Does the way you LABEL the raw experience CHANGE the overall experience?

Its a bit different with awareness. Awareness seems to have the quality to be able to be aware of it self. "my awareness" is the awareness that i am aware of, that i am experiencing. While awareness in general also include awareness that i don't experience, e.g. other peoples awareness.

Regards
Henrik

Hi Henrik,

Sorry the internet ate your message!

So let's see what can be found in direct experience, and what is labelling / thinking / speculation...

Is 'ownership' an aspect of direct experience? Is ownership something that can be sensed directly like 'redness' or 'roughness'? In other words, is there anything in direct experience (not memory or deduction, but actual sensations in the present moment) that tells you that it is 'my' hand?

Is there anything in direct experience that tells you that it is 'my' computer screen? 'My' floor? Or that it is not 'my' sky?

Say you're walking down the street, you see a small patch of colour on the ground ahead, as you get closer it becomes clear it is a glove; how would your experience of that patch of colour change when you realised it was your glove?

Is 'mine' a thought-construct added onto direct experience, or can it be found in direct experience?

Let me know what you find!

Perry

Hi Perry

Is 'ownership' an aspect of direct experience? Is ownership something that can be sensed directly like 'redness' or 'roughness'? In other words, is there anything in direct experience (not memory or deduction, but actual sensations in the present moment) that tells you that it is 'my' hand?

No. Not i direct experience. But by observing that the hand is connected the body that my awareness is connected to, i make that conclusion.

Is there anything in direct experience that tells you that it is 'my' computer screen? 'My' floor? Or that it is not 'my' sky?

No.

Say you're walking down the street, you see a small patch of colour on the ground ahead, as you get closer it becomes clear it is a glove; how would your experience of that patch of colour change when you realised it was your glove?

No change.

Is 'mine' a thought-construct added onto direct experience, or can it be found in direct experience?

Its a thought.

But how about awareness?

Regards,
Henrik

Hi Henrik,

We'll come back to awareness, but bear with me for the moment:

Say you're walking down the street, you see a small patch of colour on the ground ahead, as you get closer it becomes clear it is a glove; how would your experience of that patch of colour change when you realised it was your glove?

No change.

OK, so the raw visual impression would not change, but how about your overall experience in relation to this 'patch of colour'?

Suddenly attaching the label 'mine' to the patch of colour introduces something new into the experience, wouldn't you say? I'm sure you can find your own way to put this, but I'd say that when the realisation dawns 'hey, that is mine!', it is as if "I" suddenly experience myself as joined to "it", the separation between "me" and "it" is suddenly very apparent, there is an urge to close the gap.... For present purposes, what is most significant is that, suddenly, along with 'mine' comes a much stronger sense of the 'me' that owns ... can you relate to this?

This is important, and worth exploring, because it provides the opportunity to witness the birth of 'me' and 'mine' ... normally we take 'me' and 'mine' for granted at face value, but having witnessed the birth of 'me' and 'mine', it may become obvious that 'me' and 'mine' are mental creations and not part of direct experience.

It might be worth checking back over the last few posts, since it should be clearer now what the intention was behind the earlier exercises: to ensure that you can clearly distinguish what if feels with and without the addition of 'me' and 'mine' to primary experience. Do you have a clear sense (in experience, not understanding) of these two states now?

OK, I realise you want to get onto awareness :-) .... I've not forgotten, but I've gone back over 'me' and 'mine' because mastering what is above would be a very helpful foundation for investigating the significance of awareness.

*******************************************************************

So, as you ask, what about awareness?

Let's make sure some possible misunderstandings are out of the way first...

There is a field of experience that is present to 'this' awareness - 'your' experience is not 'my' experience. Realising no-self does not change the fact that experience of 'this body' is associated with 'this awareness'. So, conventionally speaking, there is a 'self' comprising 'this body', 'these thoughts', 'these feelings', 'these perceptions', and 'this awareness', and after realising that there is no "I", all of this remains as it was.

What 'no self' is pointing to is that there is nothing in addition to this, no "I" that "owns" it all. The owner is just a made-up character in a fictional story. Realising this is just a subtle shift in perspective, dropping an assumption because it is unwarranted - everything else carries on as before, at least in the short term.

So in the light of this, when you say 'my awareness', is there really a 'me' that 'owns' awareness?

What if 'experience' and 'experiencer' are actually the same thing?

x
Perry

Hi Perry,

OK, so the raw visual impression would not change, but how about your overall experience in relation to this 'patch of colour'?

Suddenly attaching the label 'mine' to the patch of colour introduces something new into the experience, wouldn't you say? I'm sure you can find your own way to put this, but I'd say that when the realisation dawns 'hey, that is mine!', it is as if "I" suddenly experience myself as joined to "it", the separation between "me" and "it" is suddenly very apparent, there is an urge to close the gap.... For present purposes, what is most significant is that, suddenly, along with 'mine' comes a much stronger sense of the 'me' that owns ... can you relate to this?

Yes i agree. Adding the label i changes the raw experience.

It might be worth checking back over the last few posts, since it should be clearer now what the intention was behind the earlier exercises: to ensure that you can clearly distinguish what if feels with and without the addition of 'me' and 'mine' to primary experience. Do you have a clear sense (in experience, not understanding) of these two states now?

Yes.

What 'no self' is pointing to is that there is nothing in addition to this, no "I" that "owns" it all. The owner is just a made-up character in a fictional story. Realising this is just a subtle shift in perspective, dropping an assumption because it is unwarranted - everything else carries on as before, at least in the short term.

Yes i see that.

So in the light of this, when you say 'my awareness', is there really a 'me' that 'owns' awareness?

No there is just awareness.

What if 'experience' and 'experiencer' are actually the same thing?

I guess it is the same.

Ok so there is awareness connected to this body. Its not owned by an "I". Its just awareness. But isn't there something called a soul? When this body dies, i guess this piece of awareness leaves the body, together with some other mental stuff (memory of past experiences) and may get reincarnated in another body later? Isn't that soul a identity in some form?

Regards
Henrik

Hi Henrik,

But isn't there something called a soul? When this body dies, i guess this piece of awareness leaves the body, together with some other mental stuff (memory of past experiences) and may get reincarnated in another body later? Isn't that soul a identity in some form?

Who knows? This may be interesting to speculate about, but it is outside of direct experience, and outside the scope of what we're doing here.

Here we are focussed on one thing - seeing through the illusion of self.

And from this point of view, you seemed to be on the brink of something:

Ok so there is awareness connected to this body. Its not owned by an "I". Its just awareness.

Yes!

Please stay with this - it may not be obvious, but this is very significant.

So, leaving aside theoretical speculation and sticking to what can be discovered in direct experience: is there an "I" or a "self" in reality, or only in thought?

How does it feel to conclude that there is no "I" that owns awareness? How does it feel to conclude that there is no "experiencer" separate from "experience"?

x
Perry

Hi Perry,

So, leaving aside theoretical speculation and sticking to what can be discovered in direct experience: is there an "I" or a "self" in reality, or only in thought?

Well, what i call "I" or label "I" is really awareness. I feel that I am awareness. That "I" = "Awareness". Yes there is no "I" that owns the awareness in the same way as there is nobody that owns "me".

How does it feel to conclude that there is no "I" that owns awareness? How does it feel to conclude that there is no "experiencer" separate from "experience"?

Its the same as saying there is not "I" that owns me. Isn't it just a play of words. I seems not to be able to get rid of the identification between "I" and "Awareness".

Regards
Henrik

Hi Henrik,

I seems not to be able to get rid of the identification between "I" and "Awareness"

That's OK. No need to get rid of anything. Just see what is there.

Look at the sensations involved in what you are calling 'identification' - what, in direct experience, is 'identification'?

x
Perry

Hi Perry,

Look at the sensations involved in what you are calling 'identification' - what, in direct experience, is 'identification'?

The sensation of identification, in direct experience, is the sensation that i am something that is separate from me.

For there to be identification there must be something that identify with something else. E.g. "I" identify with "awareness". That of cause is non-sense as there can't be an "I" separate from awareness in reality.

If I am awareness then there shouldn't be any separation or identification.

Regards
Henrik

Hi Henrik,

The sensation of identification, in direct experience, is the sensation that i am something that is separate from me.

That is still an interpretation - what is the direct experience?

By direct experience here I mean immediate sensations - what can be seen, felt, tasted, heard, plus observed thoughts .....

..... so for example if I was asked "what, in direct experience, is hunger?" I would not reply "it is when i want to eat", since this is an interpretation - the direct experience has already been labelled, and "it is when i want to eat" is just reporting the label

so instead I might say "there is a mildly uncomfortable pinching sensation around the stomach, and thoughts arise frequently with images of food ... the label 'hungry' arises, then the thought 'I am hungry' and eventually the thought 'I want to get something to eat'"

get that hang of distinguishing direct experience from labelling and you're most of the way there...

I seems not to be able to get rid of the identification between "I" and "Awareness"

'identification' is labelling ... can you say what, in direct experience, is being labelled 'identification'? Of course, this may be hard to put into words, but what is important is that you see beneath the labelling - just tell me what you find as best you can.

If I am awareness then there shouldn't be any separation or identification.

likewise 'separation' - what is going on that is labelled 'separation'?

[...] shouldn't be [...]

Nothing needs to be different, except the clarity with which you recognise labelling for what it is

x
Perry

Hi Perry,

Ok

'identification' is labelling ... can you say what, in direct experience, is being labelled 'identification'? Of course, this may be hard to put into words, but what is important is that you see beneath the labelling - just tell me what you find as best you can.

I experience "Identification" as the sensation of fusion. Becoming one with whatever is identified with or thinking that I am that thing. E.g. I look at something and get the thought that i am that thing. That it is me.

I am looking at awareness and get the thought or the feeling that i am awareness.

Regards
Henrik

Hi Henrik,

Good!

I am looking at awareness and get the thought or the feeling that i am awareness.

Ok, so let's take a real close look at the direct experience here...

Please could you set a couple of blocks of time aside, as you would for meditation, at least 5 minutes each? This will need longer than a single look...

Sitting comfortably, turn your attention to awareness, then:

Notice the thought 'I am looking at awareness' as it arises.
Notice the thought 'I am looking at awareness' as it is present.
Notice the thought 'I am looking at awareness' as it passes.
Notice experience in the absence of the thought 'I am looking at awareness'

Sitting in awareness:
Notice the thought or feeling 'I am awareness' as it arises.
Notice the thought or feeling 'I am awareness' as it is present.
Notice the thought or feeling 'I am awareness' as it passes.
Sitting in awareness, notice experience in the absence of the thought or feeling 'I am awareness'

Let me know how you get on!

x
Perry

HI Perry,

I really tried this exercise but find it very difficult. First of all i find it difficult to look at awareness. Its like asking a flash light to point at itself or ask a person to look at his own eye. How can you do that?

"Looking at awareness" seems to be nothing else than a thought. Yes i arises and passes. When its not there i seems to be a bit unconscious or non existent.

Same with the thought or feeling 'I am awareness." When its not there i seems a bit unconscious or non existent.

Regards,
Henrik

Hi Henrik,

First of all i find it difficult to look at awareness. Its like asking a flash light to point at itself or ask a person to look at his own eye. How can you do that?

"Looking at awareness" seems to be nothing else than a thought.

Yes! Excellent, great work!

So "looking at awareness" is just a thought that arises and passes IN awareness, it is not literally true... yes?

Same with the thought or feeling 'I am awareness." When its not there i seems a bit unconscious or non existent.

Can you investigate the thought or feeling 'I am awareness' some more .... does this also arise and pass in awareness? Is this thought/feeling ALWAYS present where there is awareness, or is there ever awareness before or after this thought/feeling? Where this thought/feeling is absent, is there COMPLETE absence of consciousness / existence?

Again, you may need to set aside a chunk of time for this investigation, in order to give space to allow the thought/feeling to arise and pass.

x
Perry