The Gate

Can you notice the body breathing right now? What do you see going on? Is someone - a me - in the body, making the breathing?
When a finger moves, is a finger moving or a you moving the finger? What do you see making the finger move?

Can you notice the body breathing right now? What do you see going on? Is someone - a me - in the body, making the breathing?
When a finger moves, is a finger moving or a you moving the finger? What do you see making the finger move?

Hi Sandra. There is no one doing the breathing. Breathing happens automatically, on its own.

When a finger moves, there is not a me moving the finger. However, there are brain signals and neural commands from the brain going to the finger to make that movement happen. So it's a collective effort of brain, neurons, muscles, knuckles, etc. that makes the finger move.

I'm pretty aware of this intelligent energy animating this body. It is the energy that has breathing happen quite automatically, blood flow to all the organs, heart beat, stomach digest food, all effortlessly. There is no "I" who commands to make that happen. It happens all by itself, as an expression of this intelligent energy.

When I look closely at what's here in this moment, all I can find is this intelligent energy animating the body, and the body parts. Perhaps this intelligent energy also produces thoughts and allows for awareness and perception.

But this intelligent energy does not have a form. It is not a separate entity, per se. It has no boundaries to it. It is not an "I".

Hi Emily,

Your post it's like a reflection, a cogitation. What I get from it are mostly thoughts about what you think it's going on. We need to use language and thoughts to communicate but it seems to me you are trusting the thinking process to see what I'm pointing at. And a thought or a bunch of thoughts can't see! So, instead of thinking you need to use the senses!

When you look around you, what do you see? What is going on around you? Can you please write a description of what is there to describe, as best as you can?

Take care,
S

Hi Sandra,

I will answer your questions now by using the senses.

When you look around you, what do you see? What is going on around you? Can you please write a description of what is there to describe, as best as you can?

When I look around me, I see computer, table, mirrors, trees, body parts like fingers, legs, toes, etc. The rain is falling, there is sound of droplets falling on the roof and on the ground. There is sensation of chilliness from the night wind.

Using the same senses to answer your previous questions:

Can you notice the body breathing right now? What do you see going on? Is someone - a me - in the body, making the breathing?
When a finger moves, is a finger moving or a you moving the finger? What do you see making the finger move?

Yes I can notice the body breathing right now. There is air going in and out of the nostrils with a warm sensation. The breathing just happens, there is no one in charge or commanding the breathing that can be observed.

When a finger moves, it is the finger that moves. There is not a me moving the finger. However, there are neural signals firing from the brain going to the finger to make that movement happen. Neural signals cannot be seen with the naked eye but can be detected with proper devices. So the phenomenon of a finger moving is a collective effort of brain, neurons, muscles, knuckles, etc. that makes the finger move.

Thank you Sandra.

Hi Emily,

You know how to look, that's great!
You didn't described a you.
Why not?
Did you notice the absence of a you?
Do you still think a real you can be found using the senses?

Take care,
S

Hi Sandra!

You didn't described a you.
Why not?
Did you notice the absence of a you?
Do you still think a real you can be found using the senses?

I did not see an "I" or a "me". I saw a person. A body. Just like a leaf, a wallet, a dog, a cat. So there is a person. There is a human body.
I don't think a real "I" can be found using the senses. Just like, if looking at the dog, I can't say, "There's an I in the dog." Or, if looking at the leaf, I can't say, "There's an I in the leaf." For the same reason, if looking at the body, I can't say, "There's an I in the body."

I have some questions though... In these following statements: "This dog is very friendly." And, "Phillip loves to talk." Do we refer to 'the dog' or the person named 'Phillip' as a separate entity with a characteristic that is distinct from others?

Thank you Sandra.

Hi Emily,

I remember you wrote that you think a you, a person, is the total of the body parts - or something similar.
To me that is like saying that a bunch of buildings is a university, it doesn't make sense.
We can use the label person to talk about the body but I don't understand why you say the body is a person.

I don't think a real "I" can be found using the senses. Just like, if looking at the dog, I can't say, "There's an I in the dog." Or, if looking at the leaf, I can't say, "There's an I in the leaf." For the same reason, if looking at the body, I can't say, "There's an I in the body."

What is the difference between using the label "person" and the label "I"? I don't get it. If it is seen a real "I" can't be found, how can a "person" be found? Isn't it the same?

I have some questions though... In these following statements: "This dog is very friendly." And, "Phillip loves to talk." Do we refer to 'the dog' or the person named 'Phillip' as a separate entity with a characteristic that is distinct from others?

Maybe we do. That's how language and thinking works. But is it true? Are Philip or the dog real separate subjects? Does being distinct equals being separate? A finger isn't the palm of the hand. Are they separate?

Take care,
S

Hi Sandra!

I remember you wrote that you think a you, a person, is the total of the body parts - or something similar.
To me that is like saying that a bunch of buildings is a university, it doesn't make sense.
We can use the label person to talk about the body but I don't understand why you say the body is a person.

What is the difference between using the label "person" and the label "I"? I don't get it. If it is seen a real "I" can't be found, how can a "person" be found? Isn't it the same?

When I say 'person' it is to distinguish a body of human race, versus dogs, cats, lizards, etc. So there is a dog body comprised of muscles, skins and bones, but it is not the same as a human body. So the word 'person' is used to refer to a human body.

Other than that, I agree that a 'self' or 'I' cannot be found using the senses.

Are Philip or the dog real separate subjects? Does being distinct equals being separate? A finger isn't the palm of the hand. Are they separate?

No, being distinct is not the same as being separate. I like your comparison with the finger and the palm of the hands. It makes sense.

Thanks Sandra.

Hi Emily,

Thank you for your reply. If possible, if true, can you give me three reasons why you now realize - by looking to your present immediate experience / using the senses - that a you, an I, is an illusion?

Take care,
S

If possible, if true, can you give me three reasons why you now realize - by looking to your present immediate experience / using the senses - that a you, an I, is an illusion?

Hi Sandra.

1. In looking at the present, immediate experience using the senses, what can be observed here are ever-changing mental processes and physical body parts. Different thoughts and feelings constantly arise and disappear. Some days the belly looks bigger, some days smaller. Some days the eyes are smaller, some days bigger. There is a lack of a persistent, unchanging "I" that can be found inside of the body.

2. There are sensations arising in the body, e.g. an urge in the bladder that wants relief. A thought arises 'I need to pee.' However this is only a thought that has no fact in reality. There is the thought that there is an "I" here and that "I" needs to pee. In fact, there is only a sensation in the bladder. The thought 'I need to pee' arose later, claiming to be the subject of that experience. But it is only a thought and it is not real. Just because 'I' exists in thought, that doesn't make it real.

3. There are sensations arising in the body, e.g. discomfort and tension. Thoughts arise, 'I feel uncomfortable and tense.' Feelings of discomfort and tension exist in that moment, however it is impossible to pinpoint who it is that has that feeling. Feelings just arise.

4. Thoughts arise 'I will move to the other room to avoid this person.' What happens is, a thought arise, and a movement happens afterwards - body moving to another room. However there is not an 'I' who willfully makes the decision. 'I' is another component of thought, a fictitious character existing only in thought, who claims to have made the decision. Later on another thought arise 'Well I may just stay here and not move.' There is no 'I' that has changed his/her mind. There simply is just another thought.

5. There are leaves, trees, dogs, cats, etc. Then there is the body. Essentially there is no difference between these life beings. There is no 'self' existing in the leaf, the tree, the dog, the cat. Similarly, how can there be a 'self' in the body? These things are distinct but they are not separate, like leaves on the same tree are distinct but are not separate.

6. A thought can arise with a content about just anything, and it can look real even though that content never exists in reality. e.g. a thought about a blue elephant. That blue elephant exists nowhere in reality but only in thought (though it looks very real in thought). Similarly, 'I' is a content of thoughts, which has been persistent, self-reasserting, and repetitive day in day out. It doesn't exist in reality even though it seems real in thoughts.

Thanks Sandra.

Hi Emily,

That's a very nice list of reasons why you know a real self isn't real.

And how does it feel to ponder about this?

Did anything change in your life since we started this conversation?

Do you feel that something is missing? Or can you say with 100% certainty that a real separate self is an illusion?

Take care,
S

Hi Sandra,

I will answer your questions soon below, but first here are some more realizations today upon further pondering:

There is no I that thinks a thought. There is no I that feels a feeling. Thoughts and feelings occur spontaneously, arising from nowhere.

There is no I that experiences life. Experiences occur within a mind body system, spontaneously.

There is no I that decides what to do. Thoughts appear, and without apparent reasons certain thoughts are acted upon by the body while other thoughts are not acted upon.

There is awareness of thoughts, but there is no I who is having that awareness. Awareness occurs, spontaneously.

Thoughts and awareness happen spontaneously, without anyone making them happen. There is no one inside doing the thinking or the witnessing.

'I' is a content of thoughts.

- Now to answer your questions:

how does it feel to ponder about this?

Did anything change in your life since we started this conversation?

Do you feel that something is missing? Or can you say with 100% certainty that a real separate self is an illusion?

There is a feeling of lightness to ponder about this.

Nothing has changed much in my life since the start of the conversation. I don't feel that anything is missing, however, I feel that there's something I'm not yet seeing clearly.

At work, things got a bit tense between the boss and I. I feel that he underpays me and does not value me.

Admittedly, the 'I' mentioned in the previous sentence refers to the mind-body system that has a label as 'Emily.'

I started examining the thought: "He doesn't value me."

Questions that were reflected upon are:
Who is it that he doesn't value? Is there someone in here that he doesn't value?

The answer that arose was: The one he doesn't value is Emily. Emily is the name of a mind-body system (a body and thought/feeling processes) with certain qualities, characteristics, capabilities, etc. This 'thing' called Emily is not looked upon favorably because it's missing certain characteristics e.g. confidence, strength, etc.

So it feels like I'm still stuck at not seeing 100% the absence of an entity.

Thanks for your guiding questions Sandra. Would love to hear what you have to say about this too.

Hi Emily,

Emily is the name of a mind-body system (a body and thought/feeling processes) with certain qualities, characteristics, capabilities, etc. This 'thing' called Emily is not looked upon favorably because it's missing certain characteristics e.g. confidence, strength, etc.

I understand what you mean when you write "a mind-body system (a body and thought/feeling processes) with certain qualities, characteristics, capabilities, etc." but I confess that definition of what you think is here makes me cringe a little. It seems like a mechanic model of reality to me. It seems that there are these things in reality made of body and thought, etc, a little like robots in a sf story. To me that definition seems to take away the mystery and the wonder and the amazing unknowability that is inherent to what is here (saying this doesn't mean that I wonder in a state of OMG, this is all so amazing! No. I don't go into this wonderfulness I'm saying is here most of the time. But this perspective seems more real to me than yours, when I notice what is here and try to use words to talk about it).

It seems to me that you are trying to use inquiry as a way to control what is going on in life: if I see that there is no me, I'll have some control over unpleasant situations and suffering can be kept at bay. I may be completely wrong, but it seems to me that what is going on is something like that. You are probably inquiring as a way to reach a goal. Maybe that's why you say it feels you are not seeing 100% the absence of an entity - because it feels like the goal wasn't reached yet.

Regarding the situation at work, it's possible that you are seeing what you think it’s happening, not what is happening. You are probably using a story to explain what you think is going on and believing the story it's true.

Is it possible to be 100% certain about what's behind the boss thoughts and reasons to act? Maybe he isn't even acting and you think his facial expression is related to you. When it may not be related to you at all. Even if you ask him what is going on and he tries to tell you, how will you know that what he says is 100% accurate? It happens to me all the time, being sure that I know what is going on, only to realize latter that I was oh, so so wrong. It still happens with The Husband, and we've been married for 21 years. Ain't that amazing? Sometimes something happens and -
if I'm lucky - I can look at it from a healthier perspective and notice what is going on, instead of what I think it's going on. There are some things that I thought were being caused by his way of being that I've been realizing are being caused by my way of being instead. It's mind blowing. Unfortunately realizing the difference between what we think and what is going on is clouded by all this programmation we seem to have popping up, that can be triggered and not recognize while it's happening or even after it stops. We are going a little of topic here. Maybe what I'm trying to say is that you are noticing a pattern going on between you and the boss, a way of relating with him that may have very deep roots. And you are noticing this pattern and a me layer pops up also (this is happening to me and means what I think it means). So, it seems to become personal.

What are the reason why this specific situation makes you doubt you're seeing? What do you think could be different?

Take care,
S

Hi Sandra!

It seems to me that you are trying to use inquiry as a way to control what is going on in life: if I see that there is no me, I'll have some control over unpleasant situations and suffering can be kept at bay. I may be completely wrong, but it seems to me that what is going on is something like that. You are probably inquiring as a way to reach a goal. Maybe that's why you say it feels you are not seeing 100% the absence of an entity - because it feels like the goal wasn't reached yet.

Hey you are really spot on with this. I wasn't conscious of it but you could already sense what was going on. Yes, I was trying to use the 'seeing the absence of self' as a way to keep suffering at bay. After all, the name of this inquiry 'Liberation Unleashed' seems to be what this is all about, after seeing the absence of a self. If I have no sense of liberation, it means I haven't seen what's there to be seen yet. However, I've already sensed a lot of lightness and relief since some of the last posts.

What are the reason why this specific situation makes you doubt you're seeing? What do you think could be different?

About the situation at the boss: If I had thoroughly seen the absence of an "I", then the thought "He doesn't value me" would not hold any weight, because there would be no one whom he doesn't value. It would not make any sense to dwell on that thought. But right now it seems persistent there is an entity/a person/a character that he doesn't value. It's still being taken personally. That's why it looks like the 'seeing' is shaky.

Thank you Sandra.

Hi Emily,

After all, the name of this inquiry 'Liberation Unleashed' seems to be what this is all about, after seeing the absence of a self. If I have no sense of liberation, it means I haven't seen what's there to be seen yet.

I think the intention behind the name 'Liberation Unleashed' could be implying the liberty to feel it all, the good and the bad also, knowing that this is it, simply because it is what is here, happening now. A gradual saying yes to life as it is happening at the moment, instead of trying to escape what is going on by seeking something else.

It's a liberation from the belief that you are a self separate from life, a seeing that you are not what you though you were, that can open the space for further exploration and living life in a lighter way, and a progressive dropping of other beliefs.

At least that's my interpretation of what 'Liberation Unleashed' means. It is possible that other person would say something very different that would also feel accurate and true.

About the situation at the boss: If I had thoroughly seen the absence of an "I", then the thought "He doesn't value me" would not hold any weight, because there would be no one whom he doesn't value. It would not make any sense to dwell on that thought. But right now it seems persistent there is an entity/a person/a character that he doesn't value. It's still being taken personally. That's why it looks like the 'seeing' is shaky.

When the believe that you are a separate self starts getting shaky, it is possible that things that happen are felt with more intensity. Life can feel very personal, even when you can see a you is only an illusion.

It's normal to get caught in the self-story too. Before realizing a self is an illusion, getting stuck in stories about a self would happen all the time, why should this be different after?

What happens when you remember to look? Can you see a real self isn't here? Is looking to what is here and noticing what is here and what isn't here something difficult to do, when you remember to do it? When you see that a self isn't here, do you realize this seeing is a fact? Or do you still believe a you must exist somewhere?

Take care,
S