The Gate

Hi Sandra,

I'm back on the inquiry now... have been really busy with work, exhausted and tired... but getting back now...

I assume you think the body is what you are? If that's the case, is the body the self we are looking for?

What I see right here, doing the inquiry, is the body.
However, I do not know for sure if the body is the self we're looking for. It might be, it might be not.
I do not know what the 'self' looks like, so cannot tell whether the body is the 'self'.

You've found what surrounds you and the body and thoughts and sensations. Yes? Do you think it is possible to find more than this?

You know how to find what is here to be found. Or do you think you are missing something? Do you think it is possible that there is a self, an entity that isn't here? Can you be something that isn't here now?

I've found everything that is here. I don't think it's possible to find more than this. Nothing is missing. There is nothing that isn't here. What's here is the body, movements, sensations, awareness, etc.

So the question remains: Is the body the 'self' we're looking for?

I still don't know the answer to this question. At least, if I'm looking for my keys, I know what the keys look like so I know it when I see it. But I don't know what the 'self' looks like... so I don't even know exactly what I"m looking for.

thank you Sandra!

Hi Emily, glad you're back.
You said you don't know how a self looks like. Why not?
Pick an object, any object, and look at it. Do you have doubts about how that object looks like?
If your answer is no, why not?
What's the difference in these 2 experiences: looking to an object and looking to a self?
You know how the body looks like and you also know what the body is made of. So, why do you think the body may be a self?

Take care,
S

You said you don't know how a self looks like. Why not?
Pick an object, any object, and look at it. Do you have doubts about how that object looks like?
If your answer is no, why not?
What's the difference in these 2 experiences: looking to an object and looking to a self?

Hi Sandra!
I don't know what a self looks like because I've never seen it before.
I have no doubt what a cup or a water bottle looks like.
previously, you brought up the example of searching for a set of keys. The different between looking for the keys and looking for the self is that, in the first scenario, I already know what I'm looking for looks like. In the second scenario, I do not know what I"m looking for looks like... hence I don't know it when I see it. I might be looking right at the 'self' but don't even know that I'm looking at it.

You know how the body looks like and you also know what the body is made of. So, why do you think the body may be a self?

Here's what I realize:
Saying that the body might be the 'self' is no different from saying that the water bottle may be the 'self'.
I would never think that the cup, the book, the mirror, the table, the tree, etc. is the self, or is 'me'.
So I'm not sure why I think that the body is 'me' or is the 'self'.

But... can this 'self' or this 'I' be unobservable? Can this 'I' be the one who looks and sees, the subject who sees all other objects: trees, cups, tables, and even the body? Can this 'I' be the one who feels the feelings and sensations in this present moment? Can this 'I' be the one actively engaging in this inquiry right now?
Why not?

To add more to my previous post...
So far in this inquiry, we treat the 'self' or 'I' as an object that we're looking for.
What if it is not an object (like any other object) but it is the subject? What if it is the one who's looking, instead of the one being looked at? And that's why it cannot be found by looking outward.

Hi Emily,
Santa Claus is a subject also. Does talking and writting about Santa make it real?
Can this subject you talk about in your last post be found if you look inward? Where would this inward be located?
Take care,
S

Hi Sandra,

Santa Claus is not a subject. Anything that is seen by looking outward is an object from the vantage point of that which is looking. In this case, Santa Claus is just an object, just as the cup, the table, the chair.

That which is looking cannot be seen by looking inward with the naked eye. It cannot be seen or observed with the naked eye. It is formless, it is the spiritual energy that allows awareness, perception, sensing, the same energy that animates the body and the muscles.

Hi Emily,

What are the reasons that make you say Santa is an object?

We have been talking for a while. Is there something that - because of looking at it - you realized isn't a self, or being done or controled by a self?

Take care,
S

What are the reasons that make you say Santa is an object?

Hi Sandra, Santa is an object because it can be observed and seen from the vantage point of the seer, just like a cup, a table, a chair. In this case the person who sees is the subject.

Is there something that - because of looking at it - you realized isn't a self, or being done or controled by a self?

I am not sure if I understand your question. Can you rephrase it?

Thank you Sandra!

Emily

Hi Emily,
When you say Santa Claus is an object, are you saying Santa is a conceptual object?
I was trying to say that Santa can't be experienced because it only exists in thinking.
Do you understand that some labels point to things that are only imaginary?

I was asking if there are things you thought were a self and realized aren't a self.

Take care,
S

When you say Santa Claus is an object, are you saying Santa is a conceptual object?
I was trying to say that Santa can't be experienced because it only exists in thinking.
Do you understand that some labels point to things that are only imaginary?

Hi Sandra, yes Santa is a conceptual object. It's a thought, a concept. Yes, Santa only exists in thinking.
Yes I understand that some labels point to things that are only imaginary.

I was asking if there are things you thought were a self and realized aren't a self.

I feel like I"m just going through the motions answering these questions about the 'self'... answering from the same known library of what I know... the same ideas and answers over and over again. I'm not seeing or realizing anything new...

Maybe if we switch to talking about 'I' or 'me' instead of 'self' it would be more useful. let's try?

So the answer to the question above is: No. I thought the body was "me" and until now I still am not sure whether it is "me" or not.

Hi Emily,

Can you make a list of what inside the body, may be a me?

Thanks,
S

Hi Sandra,

I don't think that "I" lives inside the body. For some reason, I think "I" is the whole body... So "I" is the totality of flesh and bones, muscles, organs, also brains, nervous system, thoughts, feelings, awareness, abilities, etc.

Hi Emily. You seem so sure that the body is a me. Can you find a small reason why this may not be true?

Hi Emily. You seem so sure that the body is a me. Can you find a small reason why this may not be true?

Hi Sandra, that's what I think but I'm open to being mistaken about it. It might not be the truth.