The Gate

Hello Kay,

Going into this for the second time, there’s a bit of low-level mix of discomfort / fear / anxiety / nervousness / frustration at the possibility of not getting it, not looking properly, or not being able to explain my attempts adequately. Basically a fear of being dumb!
Anyway, trying to give my sincere, honest effort with this.

Does the colour itself suggest in any way that it knows anything about an ‘apple’? Or is it just simply AE of colour?
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that the colour appearing is that of an ‘apple’?

Outside of thought, I can’t find anything in the colour itself to suggest ‘apple’. There is only AE of colour.

Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is an apple, and that it knows anything about an ‘apple’? Or is it just simply AE of sensation?
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that it is the sensation has anything to do with an ‘apple’?

When holding the apple, there is nothing in the sensation itself that is ‘apple’. I experience only AE of sensation.

Does taste itself suggest in any way that it knows anything about an apple? Or is there just simply AE of taste?
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that it is the taste of an ‘apple’?

Tasting the apple, there is only AE of taste!

Does smell itself suggest in any way that it knows anything about an apple? Or is there just simple AE of smell?
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that it is the smell of an ‘apple’?

‘Apple’ is not contained in the smell itself!

Does the sound itself suggest in any way that it knows anything about an apple? Or is there just simple AE of sound?
Without thought, without any preconceived ideas, how is it known that it is the sound is that of an ‘apple’?

There is nothing in the sound itself that suggests ‘apple’.

Does the label itself or the thought itself know anything about an ‘apple’? Or are they just simply AE of label/thought?

This question brings up the most discomfort and confusion.
Thought itself doesn’t know ‘apple’, it just AE of the label / thought.

Best,

Gray

Hi Gray,

Going into this for the second time, there’s a bit of low-level mix of discomfort / fear / anxiety / nervousness / frustration at the possibility of not getting it, not looking properly, or not being able to explain my attempts adequately. Basically a fear of being dumb!
Anyway, trying to give my sincere, honest effort with this.

Thank you for your sincerity and honesty, it will benefit you greatly. There is no one here to judge you or to think you are stupid. I have been where you are at, so I have an understanding of what you are saying, thinking and feeling. It is natural to have these fears – the fear of seeing – what that may mean, look like, feel like, along with the fear of not seeing. We continue this investigation until the realisation happens…so don’t fear that. I will continue to point as long as you continue to LOOK.

With that example of LOOKING…that is how I want you to LOOK at what I am pointing to each and every time. Not just now and again..but each and every time. Every time the idea that there is an “I” that comes up that “feels” real, I want you to LOOK…just like you did with the apple, but replacing ‘apple’ with the label “I” and go through each step. Every time an idea comes up which is seemingly believed…I want you to LOOK.

Please exchange the word ‘anxious’ with ‘fearful’ and ‘dumb’ and LOOK at them all individually.

The label ‘anxious’ is AE of thought and not the AE of anxiety
The sensation labelled ‘anxious’ is AE of sensation and not AE of anxiety
The image labelled ‘me/I/person’ is AE of colour and not AE of an anxious person
The thoughts about anxiety, what it is and about a person/I being anxious, are thoughts about (content of thought) thought and are simply AE of thought and not AE of anxiety or an anxious person.

So what is known is label + sensation + colour + thought. However is ‘anxiety’ or an “I” actually known?

Here a deeper method of LOOKING, which is good to use when emotions appear. Using the ‘apple’ example will also suffice.

When ‘anxiety’ appears, close your eyes and do the following:

1) Look at the label/thought ‘anxiety’ itself. See the label/word ‘anxiety’ as a typewritten word in the ‘mind’s eye’ across the forehead

Does the label ‘anxiety’ know anything about anxiety, or is the word just a bunch of letters?
Is the label ‘anxiety’ itself anxious?
Can you find anyone/anything in the word itself that is anxious?

2) Then look at the sensation and ignore everything else but the sensation itself.
Inquire into the sensation and ask if the sensation itself knows anything about ‘anxiety’.

Look and see if the sensation itself is the anxious self. If the words ‘yes’ , or ‘yes, this is the self’ appears, go back to Step 1 and see the words across the forehead and repeat step 1.

And then look to see if there is anyone/anything in the sensation or behind the sensation that can be ‘anxious’.

If other random mental images appear during the noticing of the sensation, check to see if those images are the self who is anxious, or are they images that are simply arising and subsiding? If other ‘loud’ thoughts appear, check to see if they are the self that is anxious as you did in step 1.

3) Look at the mental image/outline labelled body.
Does the image/outline itself know anything about ‘anxiety’.
And then look to see if there is anyone/anything in the colour itself that knows anything about ‘anxiety’ or that can be ‘anxious’.

If other random mental images appear during the noticing of the sensation, check to see if those images are the self who is anxious, or are they images that are simply arising and subsiding? If other ‘loud’ thoughts appear, check to see if they are the self that is anxious, as you did in step 1.

4) With eyes still closed look everywhere and see if you can find anyone or anything that is anxious.

When you have done this and if no one/no thing is found, then just sit with the sensation. Just breathe normally, notice the thoughts and images that appear and let them pass on by unless they seem to hang around, then do the appropriate steps above. Allow the sensation all the room it needs in the body without pushing it aside or judging it. If it becomes too intense just take a couple of deep breaths into the sensation itself, and then notice the floor under your feet, notice your backside on the chair and then notice what is in the room you are sitting in and name them out loud, while being aware of the sensation and remember to breathe normally. If the sensation does not dissipate at all or only dissipates a little, that is okay, just notice it, without doing anything with it and just go about your day.

We are not trying to get rid of the sensation labelled ‘anxiety’ or the arising thoughts or images. We are only LOOKING to see what is actually appearing (ie thought, sensation, colour/image) as opposed to what thought is saying ABOUT what actually IS.

Let me know how you go.

Does the label itself or the thought itself know anything about an ‘apple’? Or are they just simply AE of label/thought?

This question brings up the most discomfort and confusion.

So whenever, discomfort, fear, confusion, anxiety, feeling dumb, doubt or anything appears have a LOOK in that moment. If you are unable to LOOK in that moment…when you have the time...bring the event/story that seemingly created the emotions to ‘mind’ and then LOOK.

Thought itself doesn’t know ‘apple’, it just AE of the label / thought.

Yes, so apple is not known, what is known is colour, sensation, taste, smell, sound and thought.

Love, Kay

Hello Kay,

We continue this investigation until the realisation happens…so don’t fear that. I will continue to point as long as you continue to LOOK.

I really appreciate this. Thank you, Kay.

So what is known is label + sensation + colour + thought. However is ‘anxiety’ or an “I” actually known?

I can only find ‘anxious’, ‘fearful’, and ‘dumb’ in the content of thoughts, and this feels like AE of ‘anxious’, ‘fearful’, and ‘dumb’. I know the thoughts are just stories, but there is still association as happening to ‘me’ or being a problem in ‘my’ life.

Let me know how you go.

I seemed to have trouble moving past step 2. There is a feeling of connection between the label and the sensation, regardless of what the label is; fear, anxiety, anger etc. I keep going in the step 1 – 2 loop, and there is still a sense of ‘this is the anxious self’.
It was interesting to see this process get hijacked by frustration. Label ‘frustration’ appears in thought and attaches to the same bodily feeling!

I am going to give this more time tomorrow, as I definitely have not yet grasped much of it, despite hours of attempted looking. Still, I wanted to share my experience today with the exercise in case you have any further advice or find anything here I should explore further.

Best,

Gray

Hi Gray,

So what is known is label + sensation + colour + thought. However is ‘anxiety’ or an “I” actually known?

I can only find ‘anxious’, ‘fearful’, and ‘dumb’ in the content of thoughts, and this feels like AE of ‘anxious’, ‘fearful’, and ‘dumb’. I know the thoughts are just stories, but there is still association as happening to ‘me’ or being a problem in ‘my’ life.

And the “this feels like AE of ‘anxious’, ‘fearful’, and ‘dumb’” is AE of thought, not AE of any of those ‘feelings’.

Find a comfortable place to sit or lie.
Relax for a few minutes - take calming breaths.

For 30 to 60 seconds each, do these exercises:
Bring your awareness to your entire body - sense it fully, head to toe.
Run your hands down over your torso. Feel the solidity of it.
Now bring your awareness to your feet. Again, feel them. Move them a bit.
Then bring your awareness to your hands. Open and close them.
Bring your awareness to your face - all of it. Touch it with your hand.
Now point your index finger to where the “I/me” is located.
Touch the exact location of "I/me".

Answer these questions:

Were you able to find and feel "I/me" in a direct way like the other parts of your body?
Where is it?
What did you find?
Something? Anything? Nothing?
What sensations did you feel in your body that identified "I/me” (If any.)

Tell me what you experienced and found, by way of Actual Experience.

Let me know how you go.

I seemed to have trouble moving past step 2. There is a feeling of connection between the label and the sensation, regardless of what the label is; fear, anxiety, anger etc. I keep going in the step 1 – 2 loop, and there is still a sense of ‘this is the anxious self’.

We are not trying to get rid of the idea of the appearance of an ‘anxious self’. Our aim is to see what actually IS, as opposed to what thought says IS.

Can you find an actual self in the sensation itself?
Does the sensation itself in any way suggest that it is a self?

So again, we are not trying to get rid of the idea of it being an anxious self and we are not trying to get rid of the sensation but LOOKING to see if an anxious self can be found at all.

It was interesting to see this process get hijacked by frustration. Label ‘frustration’ appears in thought and attaches to the same bodily feeling!

Yes, because there is an idea that something should change. LOOKING is not the same as seeking. Seeking is always towards something that is not present, or trying to get away from something that is present. Looking is investigating what is present; it's for no reason other than itself. It's done for its own sake. If you're expecting something from LOOKING, then you're not LOOKING, you're seeking for what you expect LOOKING will give you

I am going to give this more time tomorrow, as I definitely have not yet grasped much of it, despite hours of attempted looking. Still, I wanted to share my experience today with the exercise in case you have any further advice or find anything here I should explore further.

If it is difficult then there is an expectation that the sensation/idea should change. The key is to be curious, like a child, to what you will find – instead of the idea that something needs to be gotten rid of or change. LOOKING is not done for the purpose of getting rid of anything or getting anything to change...it is simply to see what actually IS.

Sensation can be found, but can a ‘feeler’ of sensation be found?
Can an “I” be found in sensation itself?

Thought/label can be found, but can a thinker of thought be found?
Can an “I” be found in thought itself?

Love, Kay

Hi Kay,

If it is difficult then there is an expectation that the sensation/idea should change.

Thank you for pointing this out. I do need to be more aware of striving to change my experience to match what I think or have imagined it should be like. As I have become more active and aware of this it has also become more subtle and tricky to notice.

My findings with the exercise and questions below.

Tell me what you experienced and found, by way of Actual Experience.

I could find AE of sensation, but no AE of ‘I / me’ anywhere during the exercise. There was nowhere to point to where 'I / me' could be located.

Can you find an actual self in the sensation itself?

I could not find an actual self in the sensation, only the AE of sensation.

Does the sensation itself in any way suggest that it is a self?

It does not.

Sensation can be found, but can a ‘feeler’ of sensation be found?

No! Cannot find a ‘feeler’ of sensation.

Can an “I” be found in sensation itself?

I can’t find any ‘I’ in the sensation.

Thought/label can be found, but can a thinker of thought be found?

No ‘thinker’ can be found.

Can an “I” be found in thought itself?

An ‘I’ can’t be found in thought itself.

Best,

Gray

Hello Gray,

If it is difficult then there is an expectation that the sensation/idea should change.

Thank you for pointing this out. I do need to be more aware of striving to change my experience to match what I think or have imagined it should be like. As I have become more active and aware of this it has also become more subtle and tricky to notice.

Good thing to be aware of :)

Tell me what you experienced and found, by way of Actual Experience.

I could find AE of sensation, but no AE of ‘I / me’ anywhere during the exercise. There was nowhere to point to where 'I / me' could be located.

If you could find AE of sensation, then that is where the idea of an "I" resided is. I want you to really double check this, so please do the following exercise. We are not actually looking for the "I", we are looking where thought says the idea of an "I" resides. Just allow the pointing to happen where it happens.

Thought says that the foot is ‘down there’. So presumably you are above your foot. Where are you? Sit quietly, close your eyes, take a few breaths and locate where you feel yourself to be. Locate yourself vertically in the body, horizontally to the left or right, and depth, how far in. Feel how big you are, where you reside. Then point with a finger to ‘you’. Open your eyes, where is your finger pointing?

Love, Kay

Hello Kay,

Thought says that the foot is ‘down there’. So presumably you are above your foot. Where are you? Sit quietly, close your eyes, take a few breaths and locate where you feel yourself to be. Locate yourself vertically in the body, horizontally to the left or right, and depth, how far in. Feel how big you are, where you reside. Then point with a finger to ‘you’. Open your eyes, where is your finger pointing?

The finger pointed at the solar plexus.

Best,

Gray

Hey Gray,

The finger pointed at the solar plexus.

What is its quality that makes you associate the sensation with "you"?
How is it different from other sensations?

Love, Kay

Hello Kay,

What is its quality that makes you associate the sensation with "you"?

Sensations labelled ‘feelings’ are felt as being stronger or originating from this area.

How is it different from other sensations?

It doesn’t seem to be different from other sensations... It’s still simply AE of sensation, but thought points to it as ‘me’.

Best,

Gray

Hi Kay,

Sorry, I should re-phrase the first answer as it was poorly worded.

What is its quality that makes you associate the sensation with "you"?

Feelings labelled ‘fear’, ‘worry’, ‘anxiety’, ‘happiness’, ‘love’ etc. are felt strongly, or as if they are arising from this area.

Best,

Gray

Hi Gray,

What is its quality that makes you associate the sensation with "you"?

Sensations labelled ‘feelings’ are felt as being stronger or originating from this area.

Feelings labelled ‘fear’, ‘worry’, ‘anxiety’, ‘happiness’, ‘love’ etc. are felt strongly, or as if they are arising from this area.

Yes, however, describe the qualities of the sensation itself that makes you associate the sensation as a “you"? What is it about the sensation itself that suggests the sensation is associated with a “you” or is “you”?

Normally we believe that sensation is coming from sight - the object seen. In this example, the object being the ‘hand’.

1. Close the eyes and hold up one hand. Pay attention only to the felt sensation ‘of the hand’.
2. Open the eyes, and now observe the hand by looking only.
3. While looking at the hand, pay attention to the felt sensations.

Repeat 1 to 3 as many times as needed and investigate…

Can you see that both the ‘visual sight’ and the sensation appear simultaneously but ‘separately’, meaning that none of them is coming from the other or contained by the other?

Do they just appear equally, ‘beside’ each other without any hierarchy or link between them?

Is there any link between the sensation and the sight, meaning that the sensation is ‘coming from’ the sight (labelled as ‘hand’) or only thought and mental constructs link them?

You can repeat this with all of body parts below, one-by-one. Spend a considerable amount of time on each of them:

- feet
- legs
- arms
- belly
- chest
- head (looking into the mirror)

Let me know how you go and what you notice.

How is it different from other sensations?

It doesn’t seem to be different from other sensations... It’s still simply AE of sensation, but thought points to it as ‘me’.

It doesn’t SEEM to be different or it isn’t? Please LOOK again and tell me if it is or isn't different. And if it is different, how is this known exactly?

Let's compare sensations and see what you find. Have a careful look here.

If you don’t think about it, do you know that the sensation labelled ‘fear’ is something called ‘fear’?

Is there any inherent fear in the sensation itself?

Go to the sensation at the soles of the feet. Would you label that sensation ‘fear’? Or is it just a neutral, undefined tingling sensation?

Now compare the sensation of the soles of the feet – which is just neutral sensation – and the sensation in your chest (labelled ‘fear’)…what is the difference between them?

Thought would say one is a little more ‘intense’, but apart from that – any difference?

Love, Kay

Hello Kay,

Yes, however, describe the qualities of the sensation itself that makes you associate the sensation as a “you"? What is it about the sensation itself that suggests the sensation is associated with a “you” or is “you”?

Looking at the AE of sensation… and I find just AE of sensation happening… Happening to a ‘me’, or not happening to a ‘me’, eh…? It’s happening with or without a ‘me’ either way. There is no quality in the sensation to suggest or associate it with a ‘me’ other than the thought that this actual experience of sensation—which is just happening—is happening to a ‘me’.
Please excuse me while my head explodes. :)

Can you see that both the ‘visual sight’ and the sensation appear simultaneously but ‘separately’, meaning that none of them is coming from the other or contained by the other?

Yes! They are not directly associated!
I was able to look at ‘hand’ and feel sensations of ‘feet’, breaking the mental connection between the sensation and image of ‘hand’ as inherently belonging to each other.
For fun, I looked at my desk lamp instead of hand while paying attention to the sensations labelled ‘hand’ and ‘projected’ them to the image of the lamp. Cool!

Do they just appear equally, ‘beside’ each other without any hierarchy or link between them?

Well, they are both there in AE with nothing between nor linking. Just being.

Is there any link between the sensation and the sight, meaning that the sensation is ‘coming from’ the sight (labelled as ‘hand’) or only thought and mental constructs link them?

It is only thought that creates any perception of a direct link that a sensation belongs to or comes from the image.

Let me know how you go and what you notice.

The association between sensation and image is made by thought. Image and sensation are not directly connected to each other nor contain one another.

It doesn’t SEEM to be different or it isn’t? Please LOOK again and tell me if it is or isn't different. And if it is different, how is this known exactly?

No, it isn’t actually different. It’s all AE of sensation ‘ebbing and flowing’.

If you don’t think about it, do you know that the sensation labelled ‘fear’ is something called ‘fear’?

No! If not for thought, it would just be sensation.

Is there any inherent fear in the sensation itself?

Sensation is not and does not contain fear itself.

Go to the sensation at the soles of the feet. Would you label that sensation ‘fear’? Or is it just a neutral, undefined tingling sensation?

Just neutral tingling.

Now compare the sensation of the soles of the feet – which is just neutral sensation – and the sensation in your chest (labelled ‘fear’)…what is the difference between them?

There isn’t any difference! It is the same sensation.

Thought would say one is a little more ‘intense’, but apart from that – any difference?

No, outside of thought there isn’t.

Best,

Gray

Hey Gray,

Wonderful post to read! :) You have done some fantastic LOOKING.

Yes, however, describe the qualities of the sensation itself that makes you associate the sensation as a “you"? What is it about the sensation itself that suggests the sensation is associated with a “you” or is “you”?

Looking at the AE of sensation… and I find just AE of sensation happening… Happening to a ‘me’, or not happening to a ‘me’, eh…? It’s happening with or without a ‘me’ either way. There is no quality in the sensation to suggest or associate it with a ‘me’ other than the thought that this actual experience of sensation—which is just happening—is happening to a ‘me’.
Please excuse me while my head explodes. :)

Haha…what head exactly? ;) Lovely!

So let’s go back and redo this body exercise.

Please follow each step, don't leave out any. Take your time. Don't move to the next step until the previous one is clearly seen. Repeat the exercise several times.

Stand in front of a bigger mirror.

(1) First, close the eyes and feel the sensations labelled ‘body’.

(2) Then open the eyes and look into the mirror while still paying attention to the sensations.

Is there any connection between the felt sensations and the image in the mirror?
Or just thoughts (and/or mental images) suggest that there is?


(3) While still paying attention to the sensations move one hand and observe the movement from the mirror.

Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and image of movement in the mirror?

(4) Now do the same movement with the hand, but this time look at the hand directly, not from the mirror.

Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and the image ‘of movement’?
Or only thoughts suggest it?

(5) Now, pay attention only to the image in the mirror.

Does the image by itself suggest in any way that is ‘you’ or ‘your body’?
Does the image itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘body’ at all?
Or are there only colours and shapes?

(6) Where the mirror ends, some parts of the body (probably legs) cannot be seen.

Just by the image in the mirror, is there any ‘knowledge’ that there must be legs, or only thoughts and mental images suggest so?

(7) Now turn away from the mirror and look forward (don’t look directly to any body parts).

Is there a ‘body’ anywhere when all thoughts and images are ignored, or are there only sensations?

(8) Start to walk slowly.

Is there a ‘body walking’, or are there only sensations?
Is there actual experience of ‘walking’ at all?
Or just THOUGHTS ABOUT ‘walking’?
Can such a thing as ‘body’ be found OR just THOUGHTS ABOUT a ‘body’?
Can such a thing as ‘walking’ be found?

(9) Are the sensations localized in space, like ‘going through the room’; OR is there only an image that is labelled ‘room’ and appearing sensations without any location?

Can you see that both the ‘visual sight’ and the sensation appear simultaneously but ‘separately’, meaning that none of them is coming from the other or contained by the other?

Yes! They are not directly associated!

Nice! Have a look at this video clip…and let the exploding of the head continue! (smiling)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dphlhmt ... e=youtu.be

Do they just appear equally, ‘beside’ each other without any hierarchy or link between them?

Well, they are both there in AE with nothing between nor linking. Just being.

Lovely, yes! Just to further cement this…

1) Imagine holding sensation in the right hand and thought in the left hand.
Does thought, on the one hand, and sensation, on the other, know about each other?
Is there a link between the two?

2) Imagine sensation and thought are resting on either side of a pair of scales. When sensation is looked at it gets heavier. When thought is looked at it gets heavier.
Is it possible to look at both thought and sensation at the same time to balance the scales?

Is there any link between the sensation and the sight, meaning that the sensation is ‘coming from’ the sight (labelled as ‘hand’) or only thought and mental constructs link them?

It is only thought that creates any perception of a direct link that a sensation belongs to or comes from the image.

Yes! :)

Let me know how you go and what you notice.

The association between sensation and image is made by thought. Image and sensation are not directly connected to each other nor contain one another.

Beautiful! Nice LOOKING.

It doesn’t SEEM to be different or it isn’t? Please LOOK again and tell me if it is or isn't different. And if it is different, how is this known exactly?

No, it isn’t actually different. It’s all AE of sensation ‘ebbing and flowing’.

Yes, exactly. Without thought, sensation is simply sensation.
What exactly is it that would ‘feel’ that sensations differed from each other?

Let’s begin to have a look at the idea of ‘differences’ by looking at colour alone.

How is it known that there are many different colours?

Without thought, how is it known that a colour ends and another begins? LOOK carefully at the picture. How is it known that the colour labelled 'brown' is a tree and that the outside of the tree is the border which differentiates and separates the tree from the 'sky', 'grass', 'other tree'? Without thought, how would this be known?

If you don’t think about it, do you know that the sensation labelled ‘fear’ is something called ‘fear’?

No! If not for thought, it would just be sensation.

Yes!

Is there any inherent fear in the sensation itself?

Sensation is not and does not contain fear itself.

Actual experience is everything but the content of thought, as thought, in and of itself does contain any so called experiences. If thought/labels contained experience, you would be able to taste the word 'sweet', smell the word 'rose', and hear ‘thunder’ when the word ‘thunder’ appeared!

Actual Experience is also a concept, but it’s useful in that it’s pointing to what is happening now, and not what is imagined.

Now compare the sensation of the soles of the feet – which is just neutral sensation – and the sensation in your chest (labelled ‘fear’)…what is the difference between them?

There isn’t any difference! It is the same sensation.

It is simply sensation.

Thought would say one is a little more ‘intense’, but apart from that – any difference?

No, outside of thought there isn’t.

Exactly!

Love, Kay

Hello Kay,

Still working on the body exercise. Might take a while, as I want to be sure I have been looking properly.

Meanwhile, here are my answers to the other questions.

1) Imagine holding sensation in the right hand and thought in the left hand.
Does thought, on the one hand, and sensation, on the other, know about each other?
Is there a link between the two?

No. Sensation cannot know thought. Thought cannot know sensation, only create a story about sensation.

2) Imagine sensation and thought are resting on either side of a pair of scales. When sensation is looked at it gets heavier. When thought is looked at it gets heavier.
Is it possible to look at both thought and sensation at the same time to balance the scales?

What is it that could look at (and know) both thought and sensation at the same time? Can’t see how this is possible in AE.

What exactly is it that would ‘feel’ that sensations differed from each other?

There isn’t anything! It’s just thought that creates some notion of ‘different’ sensations felt by, and associated with particular parts of the body.

Without thought, how is it known that a colour ends and another begins? LOOK carefully at the picture. How is it known that the colour labelled 'brown' is a tree and that the outside of the tree is the border which differentiates and separates the tree from the 'sky', 'grass', 'other tree'? Without thought, how would this be known?

None of these things can be known without thought! AE of colour itself does not have a beginning or end, separation or boundary. Colour doesn’t ‘contain’ shape or size, is not itself an object, or tree, sky, grass etc.

Best,

Gray

Hi Gray,

Still working on the body exercise. Might take a while, as I want to be sure I have been looking properly.

I look forward to your responses from looking.

Without thought, how is it known that a colour ends and another begins? LOOK carefully at the picture. How is it known that the colour labelled 'brown' is a tree and that the outside of the tree is the border which differentiates and separates the tree from the 'sky', 'grass', 'other tree'? Without thought, how would this be known?

None of these things can be known without thought! AE of colour itself does not have a beginning or end, separation or boundary. Colour doesn’t ‘contain’ shape or size, is not itself an object, or tree, sky, grass etc.

Lovely, yes...so are there many different colourS or just simply colour?

Love, Kay