The Gate

Hey Tintu,

If thoughts say, "I can change what I'm aware of by closing my eyes", and suddenly eyes seem to close, and you are aware of only colour black:-

I was moving a finger in a certain way to see the relationship between thinking and doing something.
during this, at one point it occurred to me that, there is a thought about moving a finger, the finger moves.
and suddenly a thought popped up, "where am I between the thinking and moving the finger". it is simply not there.
The "I", "I" was thinking about was just thoughts in my head.

Nice! :) “I” is not a place where thoughts appear. “I” is a thought. It arises and subsides by itself.

If you can't choose what you're aware of, then what else is there to choose?

There is nothing "I" can choose. Things appears or awareness happens and then "I" take credit for it. basically in all this
"I" is only in thoughts and all else is happening mysteriously.

Yes, things just happen/appear…and then a thought appears saying “I can choose” or “I did this” or “I said this” ie taking credit…but there is no “I” who is taking credit, there are only thoughts ABOUT and “I” taking credit.

Let's have a look at how thought narrates what appears as life, which makes it seem like the story is about a 'you'. So, just notice the narrator and how it narrates the game…it is exactly the same to how thought narrates a seeming life lived by a seeming you!

The following link is a 7 minute clip of a soccer game. If you prefer another sport…please feel free to find one to do this exercise with. Do this exercise several times before answering the questions. The purpose of this experiment is to see how thoughts are like the commentator in the following clip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yy5pL-myDzw

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 and looking at AE, what is actually appearing/happening?

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?

Kay

Hi Kay,

Let me know what you notice when you turn the sound on and off. Without thought and looking at AE, what is actually appearing/happening?

When the commentator's sounds are heard as thoughts, then that exaggerate the actual situation.
his speculation and reactions give unfair important to certain moments compared to another moment.
the voice modulation, the name of the players, humor, nationality etc are part of pulling/biasing the viewer to the game.
the narrative also distracts the viewer from the overall play to the part of the play which the commentator think as important.

with the sound turned off, there is less distraction in the form of voice and thoughts (more real). but due to the habit of viewing a play with the commentary, there seems to be something missing. but in reality, this is more close to the reality than with the commentary.

with the sound turned on and treat the sound as sound rather than commentary, the possibility that the viewer is pulled in to the narrative is less.there is a detachment to the commentary as sound compared to commentary as commentary.

The Actual experience of the game is colors, sound, sensation, and thoughts.

Is the commentary on the football game a necessity for the play to happen?

No, the commentary negatively affects the viewers ability to see the totality of the play and invoke emotions/sensations in the viewer.

And in the same way: Is the inner narration of thought a necessity for the play of life to happen?

Inner narration is not necessary for the play of life to happen. in fact some of the beautiful moments in life happens when the narration is absent.

With Appreciation
Tintu

Hey Tintu,

Lovely observations with this exercise! Thought is 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 overlays actual experience continuously with stories. Did you notice your thoughts commentating on the commentator as he commentated the game?! 

Is the commentary on the football game a necessity for the play to happen?

No, the commentary negatively affects the viewers ability to see the totality of the play and invoke emotions/sensations in the viewer.

And is the commentator needed for the actual game to happen? Do the players need his commentation to play?

And in the same way: Is the inner narration of thought a necessity for the play of life to happen?

Inner narration is not necessary for the play of life to happen. in fact some of the beautiful moments in life happens when the narration is absent.

Yes, so with the commentary off, it is easy to see that everything is just happening. It is the commentary version of the game that sucks us into the story that the commentator was telling us about what was going on in the game. And this is no different to thoughts commentary about a ‘Tintuself’ and ‘his life’!

Thoughts are like having a radio on in the background - a voice is talking about whatever, but it doesn't affect you. Thoughts only seem like a big deal if it seems like you are thinking them, but you certainly are not. You would never believe the words coming out of a radio were *your* words - thoughts are no different.

Just to see the humorous side of thought and it’s commentation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4qc34kYHdM

So, we have looked at the idea of there being a thinker/controller of thoughts. Let’s expand on that to looking at decisions and choices and the idea of control generally.

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?

Kay

Hi kay,
Thanks for the vedio. It is really hilarious.

Did you notice your thoughts commentating on the commentator as he commentated the game?

Its funny that the thoughts were commentating even on commentator. Thouts were about commendators style of presentation, accent etc.

And is the commentator needed for the actual game to happen? Do the players need his commentation to play?

No, The commentator is not required for the actual game to happen. His commentation is not required for the play to happen.

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

There is a thought about moving the hand, and then the hand moved itself.
It seems as if it is controlled by the arising thought. The fact that the action happens after the thought or thought happens after the action and hence thought is the controller is an inference by thought. Further more when and how the thought arise to move the hand is not in anyone's hand either.

Can a ‘controller’ of any description be located?

No There is no controller as a seperate self. Even if the thought precedes action, the thought is not "mine" either.

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.

The turning happens on its own. It is difficult to locate any decision points. If it is a single turn of hand there is atleast a speculation that a thought preceded. But in a contnious turn of hand, the action continues without a thought.

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

I do not find any seperate entity which choose to turn the palm. All "i" see is thoughts and sensations and colors. "I" can see that there are "I" thoughts arising during this.

Thanks
Tintu

Good morning Tintu,

Did you notice your thoughts commentating on the commentator as he commentated the game?

Its funny that the thoughts were commentating even on commentator. Thouts were about commendators style of presentation, accent etc.

Yes…thought has something to say about everything lol

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

There is a thought about moving the hand, and then the hand moved itself.
It seems as if it is controlled by the arising thought. The fact that the action happens after the thought or thought happens after the action and hence thought is the controller is an inference by thought. Further more when and how the thought arise to move the hand is not in anyone's hand either.

Nice!

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.

The turning happens on its own. It is difficult to locate any decision points. If it is a single turn of hand there is atleast a speculation that a thought preceded. But in a contnious turn of hand, the action continues without a thought.

Yep, just like when you find yourself scratching an itch without any conscious decision to do so!

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

I do not find any seperate entity which choose to turn the palm. All "i" see is thoughts and sensations and colors. "I" can see that there are "I" thoughts arising during this.

Yep, “I” thoughts appear. Is “I” a place where thoughts appear, or is “I” a thought that arises and subsides by itself?

The aim of the following exercise is to discover whether the function of choice can really be found or confirmed in actual experience. The idea of making ‘choices‘ is a very clear example of a function that we wrongly identify as the basis of our identity.

You need to get any two different drinks you like for this exercise, ie coffee, tea, milk, water, juices, smoothies, beer, wine, etc. One will be drink A the other will be drink B

Sit for a few moments, take a few relaxed breaths and let the dust settle. When you feel ready:

1. Look at drink A and at drink B. Think about their respective qualities, the things you like about them, compare and weigh the pros and cons of each. See if a preference is manifesting for one or the other.
2. Count to 5.
3. Choose one of the drinks. Pick it up and take a sip.

Questions:
Remember that we’re looking for some kind of function, a something, an ‘I’ which is doing the ‘choosing’.

In step 1 when thinking about their respective qualities, did you ‘choose’ the qualities? Or did they kind of appear by themselves? If some preferences manifested, did you ‘choose’ these preferences? Or did they just pop up by themselves?

In step 2 when you counted to 5, if the preferences took the back seat while the numbers took the front seat, did you ‘choose’ this sequence of event? Did you ‘choose’ to shut down the preferences to give way to the counting? Did you directly experience a mental function or faculty doing the ‘choosing’? Have you seen this function in action?

In step 3 where you made a choice, did you actually witness or directly experience a mental function or faculty doing the ‘choosing’? Did anything arise that announced, ‘I am the chooser’? If so, what does this function look like?

Sometimes we describe this sense of choosing as a ‘feeling’: It feels like ‘I’ did the ‘choosing’. But the question is, can a feeling ‘choose’? Is it in the nature of a feeling to ‘choose’?

Kay

Hi Kay,

Good Morning.

Is “I” a place where thoughts appear, or is “I” a thought that arises and subsides by itself?

"I" as a thought appears and subsides. Just to clarify
I do not notice a thought of the form "I" as a standalone thought (just as "I"), it is always a thought involving "me"(This is of the form " I am reading", "i am doing", "i did a mistake" etc.)

I will work with the "choice" excercise and get back to you.

Thanks
Tintu

Hello Tintu,

Is “I” a place where thoughts appear, or is “I” a thought that arises and subsides by itself?

"I" as a thought appears and subsides. Just to clarify
I do not notice a thought of the form "I" as a standalone thought (just as "I"), it is always a thought involving "me"(This is of the form " I am reading", "i am doing", "i did a mistake" etc.)

Yes, "I" is not stand alone. However, when "I" appears as a thought, be it "I am tired", "I am going to go for a walk in the park", "I am a failure", "I am feeling scared" etc - each and every "I" thought is always referring to a 'me'..is it not..to a place 'me/I/Tintu'! Is there such a place?!

Kay

Hi Kay,

Yes, "I" is not stand alone. However, when "I" appears as a thought, be it "I am tired", "I am going to go for a walk in the park", "I am a failure", "I am feeling scared" etc - each and every "I" thought is always referring to a 'me'..is it not..to a place 'me/I/Tintu'! Is there such a place?!

Looking directly, "I" could not find such a place. looking from a thought based perspective, it is generally believed to be from the body (even though there is no conclusion from a neuroscientific perspective). it seems it is still a mystery as to how thought occurs, what is the fabric which thought is created, space where thought is perceived etc. The "center" many spiritual books talk about seems to be not visible anywhere in Actual experience.

Thanks
Tintu

It is generally believed that the sensation in the chest or around the head is where the “I” resides.
What is its quality that makes you associate the sensation with "you"?
How is it different from other sensations?


Kay

HI Kay,

It is generally believed that the sensation in the chest or around the head is where the “I” resides.
What is its quality that makes you associate the sensation with "you"?
How is it different from other sensations?

I did not think about the sensation of "I" before.
but actually, there seems to be a subtle sensation when I think about me, but I cannot say with 100% surety that there is a sensation associated with "I", "I" need to look further (I have a head buzzing sensation and a low amplitude cricket sound in ears, supposed to be typical symptoms of Tinnitus). it seemed to me that "I" is more of a thought than a sensation.

compared to other sensations it seems more subtle, others are more noticeable. but it seems all of this sensations are not in "my" control. in one hand it seems there is nothing inherently in the sensation to claim it as mine. but the fact that it occurs privately to "my body" ( or so it seems) suggest that this sensation is experienced by "me".

Thanks
Tintu

Hi Kay,

These are the observations from the "choice" exercise.

In step 1 when thinking about their respective qualities, did you ‘choose’ the qualities? Or did they kind of appear by themselves? If some preferences manifested, did you ‘choose’ these preferences? Or did they just pop up by themselves?

The qualities appeared themselves. The preferences are not chosen by "me". They just popped up by themselves.

In step 2 when you counted to 5, if the preferences took the back seat while the numbers took the front seat, did you ‘choose’ this sequence of event? Did you ‘choose’ to shut down the preferences to give way to the counting? Did you directly experience a mental function or faculty doing the ‘choosing’? Have you seen this function in action

?

"I" did not see a mental function or faculty doing the 'choosing'. "I" did not choose the sequence of event. there was a thought about counting and then counting thoughts happened/appeared. "I" did not choose to shut down the preferences and give way to the counting, that happened in its own.

In step 3 where you made a choice, did you actually witness or directly experience a mental function or faculty doing the ‘choosing’? Did anything arise that announced, ‘I am the chooser’? If so, what does this function look like?

There was no function which announces as the chooser. All I can see is thoughts happening and then the events happening without a chooser.

Sometimes we describe this sense of choosing as a ‘feeling’: It feels like ‘I’ did the ‘choosing’. But the question is, can a feeling ‘choose’? Is it in the nature of a feeling to ‘choose’?

In the experiment, I used coffee and water, the choice was coffee, There was this feeling that "I" knew "I" would choose coffee. but this is thought inferring based on previous experience and not actual experience. it is a thought which says that "I felt so". people suggest going with a gut feeling ( meaning that choose something without much analysis), it seems feeling happens after the "choice" happens.

Thanks
Tintu

Hello Tintu,

It is generally believed that the sensation in the chest or around the head is where the “I” resides.
What is its quality that makes you associate the sensation with "you"?
How is it different from other sensations?

I did not think about the sensation of "I" before.
but actually, there seems to be a subtle sensation when I think about me, but I cannot say with 100% surety that there is a sensation associated with "I", "I" need to look further (I have a head buzzing sensation and a low amplitude cricket sound in ears, supposed to be typical symptoms of Tinnitus). it seemed to me that "I" is more of a thought than a sensation.

It is generally believed that thoughts are coming from the head somewhere around the forehead. When we try to trace back the origin of a thought, it is often believed that it's coming from the forehead, because the attention automatically goes to the sensation of the forehead. Investigate this carefully as often as you can throughout the day.

What is the forehead in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image (of a forehead), right?

So, can a thought come from a sensation?
Can a thought come from a mental image?

Have a very deep look here... the forehead is one of the 'residence' of the SENSE of self. Or rather say, the sensation that is labelled as forehead is believed to be one of the location of the sense of self.

compared to other sensations it seems more subtle, others are more noticeable. but it seems all of this sensations are not in "my" control. in one hand it seems there is nothing inherently in the sensation to claim it as mine. but the fact that it occurs privately to "my body" ( or so it seems) suggest that this sensation is experienced by "me".

Yes, the subtle inference is what keeps the idea of a “my body” and a “me” ‘alive’, so to speak.
"But it feels like there is a me" is a thought that appears...however, does a 'feeling' know anything about a 'me' or 'body'?

Sometimes we describe this sense of choosing as a ‘feeling’: It feels like ‘I’ did the ‘choosing’. But the question is, can a feeling ‘choose’? Is it in the nature of a feeling to ‘choose’?

In the experiment, I used coffee and water, the choice was coffee, There was this feeling that "I" knew "I" would choose coffee. but this is thought inferring based on previous experience and not actual experience. it is a thought which says that "I felt so". people suggest going with a gut feeling ( meaning that choose something without much analysis), it seems feeling happens after the "choice" happens.

Nice observations, Tintu!

The following is an interesting clip on how scientists have revealed that decisions are made seconds before we become aware of them.

https://vimeo.com/90101368

Kay

Hi Kay,

It is generally believed that the sensation in the chest or around the head is where the “I” resides.
What is its quality that makes you associate the sensation with "you"?
How is it different from other sensations?

I was looking again at the sensation or feeling of "I" today. I was thinking that "I" is only a thought.
But the sense/feeling of "I/me" is present whenever "I" become conscious of myself (sometimes happens with an "I"thought, other times the sensation is noticed). This feels stronger when the focus falls on "me".
This feeling/sense is present as far as I remember (even from school days).
This sensation/feeling/sense is like a base feeling upon which all other sensations are attached.
This feeling is so obvious that it is taken for granted and hence subtle to recognize ( it is similar to the case where if I hear a base noise for a long time, that would become the new normal and I would not notice the noise anymore).
The feeling is so basic that it is possible that thought can interpret it as "me". it could well be a universal "feeling" present in everyone.

As I have a head buzzing sensation which seems to originate exactly at a place between the eyes, almost at the place where the forehead bends a little. since I have this sensation present whenever I look deeply, it is difficult to recognize other sensation in that area :-). buzzing, in general, get stronger the more I look, so I cannot say for sure whether it is due to me looking deeper or a physical sensation of "me".

Thanks
Tintu

Hi Kay,

What is the forehead in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image (of a forehead), right?

Yes. it is a thought as forehead is not visible to "my" eyes.

So, can a thought come from a sensation?

what is noticed is that there is a sensation and then thought associate the sensation to something (like fear) or the other way around.
so thought arising from sensation or sensation arising from thought is a deduction. in looking they arise one after the other.
sometimes "I" notice a sensation, and thought tries to find a reason for the sensation, when it is not obvious why there is a sensation.so the idea of causation seems to be something deeply rooted.

Can a thought come from a mental image?

a mental image is a thought itself?

"But it feels like there is a me" is a thought that appears...however, does a 'feeling' know anything about a 'me' or 'body'

The 'feeling' does not know anything about 'me' or 'body'

Thanks
Tintu

Hello Tintu,

It is generally believed that the sensation in the chest or around the head is where the “I” resides.
What is its quality that makes you associate the sensation with "you"?
How is it different from other sensations?

I was looking again at the sensation or feeling of "I" today. I was thinking that "I" is only a thought.
But the sense/feeling of "I/me" is present whenever "I" become conscious of myself (sometimes happens with an "I"thought, other times the sensation is noticed). This feels stronger when the focus falls on "me". This feeling/sense is present as far as I remember (even from school days).

Is the sensation labelled "I" any different to the sensation labelled 'pain'? Look at this very carefully.

This sensation/feeling/sense is like a base feeling upon which all other sensations are attached.

Yes, exactly. Any other time, the attention is just on what is appearing in the moment...then all of a sudden a thought appears and the thought seems to snap you back into an “I”. However, “seems to” is itself a thought.

Everything is running on automatic. If you watch a great movie and get sucked into a good part, then zoom out, you see it’s just a movie, though for a few minutes the focus was completely on what was going on. This is also happening in real life. There is zooming in and out of character. Identification with the story is also part of story.

This feeling is so obvious that it is taken for granted and hence subtle to recognize ( it is similar to the case where if I hear a base noise for a long time, that would become the new normal and I would not notice the noise anymore).

If the noise is no longer heard, then can be actually be appearing/known…it is actual experience as you see it in the moment?

If a tree falls in the forest and there is no one around to hear it, does it make a sound?

The feeling is so basic that it is possible that thought can interpret it as "me". it could well be a universal "feeling" present in everyone.

Yes and that subtle sensation, when it comes into focus in that moment is what thought points to and says is the ‘body’ and that is where “I’ reside!

Coming back to attention. If something in not in your awareness in this very moment…then is it known?

As I have a head buzzing sensation which seems to originate exactly at a place between the eyes, almost at the place where the forehead bends a little. since I have this sensation present whenever I look deeply, it is difficult to recognize other sensation in that area :-). buzzing, in general, get stronger the more I look, so I cannot say for sure whether it is due to me looking deeper or a physical sensation of "me".

Place a finger to the top of the head. Now ignore all thoughts, images, sounds. What is the actual experience?
Is the head actually known?
If there is no head...then how is it known that the sensation or sound (buzzing) have a location?

What is the forehead in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image (of a forehead), right?

Yes. it is a thought as forehead is not visible to "my" eyes.

Exactly. When you close your eyes and focus on the area where thought says the forehead is located...a mental image/outline of the eyes/forehead may appear…does that make them real. In other words are they actually known in that moment or only thoughts about them?

So, can a thought come from a sensation?

what is noticed is that there is a sensation and then thought associate the sensation to something (like fear) or the other way around.

so thought arising from sensation or sensation arising from thought is a deduction. in looking they arise one after the other.
sometimes "I" notice a sensation, and thought tries to find a reason for the sensation, when it is not obvious why there is a sensation.so the idea of causation seems to be something deeply rooted.

We are focussing on the sensation labelled as ‘forehead’. When you look carefully, did you find a forehead or only thoughts about a forehead?
If there is no forehead…and there is simply the appearance of sensation…can thoughts come from those sensations?

Can a thought come from a mental image?

a mental image is a thought itself?

Yes..so can a thought come from; be created by a mental image or vice versa?

"But it feels like there is a me" is a thought that appears...however, does a 'feeling' know anything about a 'me' or 'body'

The 'feeling' does not know anything about 'me' or 'body'

Exactly. Is the feeling an actual sensation or is it simply an idea (nonverbal thoughts) ABOUT there being a body and a me?

Kay