The Gate

Hey Phil,

Today I was pondering where the mistake is being made. Is the thing that I mistakenly think I am not real, or is it that the thing I think I am is real, and it’s just my identifying with it that’s where I’m tripping up?

Ie - I think I am a person. When you say to look for the me there, all I find is sensations. These sensations seem very real. Are they not real, or is it that I am wrongly interpreting the sensations to being mine?

Is there any use asking these questions if I can’t see this or find the answer myself? I feel like I’m looking but I’m just not able to come to any conclusions on my own due to whatever I’m doing wrongly/badly/incorrectly.

Thanks

Mark, I really just want to assure you you are going about this the right way.
I know how frustrating this process can be.
Even the frustration is ok, really.

You mean don’t assume to know what I’m looking for, right?

Right.

It’s hard to be told there is no self, then try to find this out for myself without knowing what to look for

Yes. It's impossible. You are not looking for something, but to notice that there is nothing.
You won't find nothing, there already is nothing.

It’s everywhere. It’s a feeling that there is an agent.

It's important to discern the difference between sensation and thought.
Is this sense you are referring to actually a sensation?
Can you be clear about that?
"A feeling that there is an agent" is already the beginning of a story, right? Can you see that?
Is it attached to a physical sensation or not?

Phil if there is no me, then who or what is trying to see that there is no me?

I simply cannot give you an answer.
It's a complete, unknowable mystery.

For there to be no me, is it just as simple as taking the “I” out of everything? Like stop viewing life from the perspective of an agent? Ie there are only objects and actions?

Can you stop viewing life from the perspective of an agent?
Maybe it just seems that way, but it's not actually that way.
Nothing has to happen for there to be 'no me'.
What is your direct experience?
Is there only objects and actions appearing now?
A thought may come in and suggest, 'well i'm here perceiving all these objects and doing these actions'.
But is that actual thought, itself, just another object in the seeing?
You may argue that there has to be an observer to be able to witness an object, and this is of course 'me'.
How do you know with 100% certainly that there has to be an observer which is separate from what is seen?
Is in not just something you have learned? something you have been taught?
What is actually happening is a ONLY a see-ing. No see-er, no object.
There is only this, the separation only seemingly exists as a thought, when it is given meaning.

Mark, which pointer are you working with?
Are you still doing buttchair regularly?

When you say to look for the me there, all I find is sensations. These sensations seem very real.

Yes, they are real, they are here, they are not owned by a 'me'.

Is there any use asking these questions if I can’t see this or find the answer myself?

The fact you are asking is because you do see it already on one level, probably there is doubt which is confusing the seeing.

I will keep pointing you in the right direction, until it gets clear.

I feel like I’m looking but I’m just not able to come to any conclusions on my own due to whatever I’m doing wrongly/badly/incorrectly.

You are not doing anything wrong. Everything is happening by itself, including the thoughts about doing it wrongly/badly/incorrectly.

Nothing belongs to this 'me'.

As for pointers, yes I am doing “buttchair” regularly.

Last night, while on the cushion, I started looking for who I am by eliminating objects in experience. Based on the principal that I cannot be something that I can see or feel in experience, I ruled out every sensation. What was left was nothing. At this point, I could see the thought of a me being attached to this nothing. A kind of identity being added over top of a void.

What confused me is, yes, when I get to this nothing, there is identification created by thought. This can be seen through for what it is; ie - just a thought, but the nothing that remains after all sensations and thoughts are seen past/through is not really nothing. I feel like there is an awareness there before thought. Is this wrong? Is this not what I am?

Is there any clear dividing line between them? Or only the Sensation with no clear division?

I’m not sure I’m getting anywhere with this exercise. I cannot sense any clear dividing line between my body and the chair.

At this point, I could see the thought of a me being attached to this nothing. A kind of identity being added over top of a void.

OK good, you are seeing what you are not :)

So you can see now that the 'Me' is just a thought?

What confused me is, yes, when I get to this nothing, there is identification created by thought. This can be seen through for what it is; ie - just a thought, but the nothing that remains after all sensations and thoughts are seen past/through is not really nothing.

You are right, the nothing is not really nothing. It is alive. It's never absent. It's hard to talk about because it has no form. I don't want to say too much about it, but If you can, rest in that, theres nothing to do there.

I feel like there is an awareness there before thought. Is this wrong? Is this not what I am?

If you know that this awareness is or is not you, what will change? Can you ever be certain?

If you can never be certain of this - how does this feel?

I’m not sure I’m getting anywhere with this exercise. I cannot sense any clear dividing line between my body and the chair.

Right. Trust you direct experience. The point of the exercise is not to find something that isn't there, it's to focus your attention into what is - only the sensations arising.

What I find interesting is the thought.

Do you really believe the thought: "I’m not sure I’m getting anywhere with this exercise"?

Notice how much importance is given to this, when your direct experience is clear.


Keep working with buttchair for now. Let the looking itself be the goal of the exercise, not to find something.

If you know that this awareness is or is not you, what will change? Can you ever be certain?

Well, I feel like this is where I am getting stuck. This awareness is what I keep coming to in my inquiry. The sense of just being, consciousness, awareness - whatever we call it. This is all that is left when I look for who I am and brush aside thoughts and sensations, but I’m told that there is no me, so this identification with being/awareness must not be correct.

so this identification with being/awareness must not be correct.

What is identifying with awareness?

Why is there a need to identify with anything?


Also your response to the question in blue doesn't answer the question! You'd be a good politician!

Please answer this and the other questions in blue, as directly as possible.

Thanks Mark, you are moving in the right direction.
Keep looking (at what is here).

So you can see now that the 'Me' is just a thought?

Well, I guess yes and no. I can see that yes, there is a thought here that attaches an identity to the experience, but for some reason, that doesn’t seem to refute the existence of the identity for me.

If you know that this awareness is or is not you, what will change? Can you ever be certain?

I only ask because I’m trying to interpret what it means to say “there is no you”. Awareness is always what I find after negative everything else. If this awareness is what it means to not be a me, then I will stop looking for something else and direct my inquiry here.

If you can never be certain of this - how does this feel?

If I can never be certain whether I am awareness or not? I think I’d be fine with uncertainty about what I am. I’d prefer to have certainty about what I am not, especially if it turns out to be true that a great deal of suffering can be reduced.

Do you really believe the thought: "I’m not sure I’m getting anywhere with this exercise"?

I do. I’ve done this exercise maybe 25-30 times and don’t see any benefit (yet), but if you recommend I stick with it, then that’s all I need to know. I will happily keep doing it.

Let the looking itself be the goal of the exercise, not to find something.

Interesting. Okay :)

Phil, this sense of being/awareness, is there where I need to look (in addition to my butt)?

Hi Mark.

Phil, this sense of being/awareness, is there where I need to look (in addition to my butt)?

Nothing is off limits with your investigation.
If your intuition or curiosity is calling to look at this 'awareness', go there.

Also:

so this identification with being/awareness must not be correct.

What is identifying with awareness?

Why is there a need to identify with anything?

Hi Phil. Sorry I’ve had an exceedingly busy day and do not have the time to post much of a reply. I do get your point about identification with awareness. Thanks.

What is identifying with awareness?

I guess the me that exists only in thought. I see that it exists only in thought, but I don’t feel like that negates its existence on a deeper level. I still feel strongly that I exist. I sense that it’s right here where I’m getting this all wrong, but I don’t know how to prod this any deeper.

Why is there a need to identify with anything?

I guess because I’m trying to verify what it means to not have a self. Is mean, is this it? When I peel away at experience and see that sensations, thoughts and emotions are not who I am, that this bare awareness is the only thing left - is the mistake I’m making here not to identify with this awareness?

This still seems too conceptual.

I meant to ask at the end if the mistake I’m making is by identifying with the awareness.

Hi mark,
Sorry I can't respond this evening. I have to leave it to tomorrow, will have plenty of time then as I'm not working. Please keep looking though. Thanks.

Hi Mark,

I’ve done this exercise maybe 25-30 times and don’t see any benefit

Sounds like there is an expectation hiding here. The looking, itself IS the benefit of this exercise.
If the looking is the goal, then you are looking with no expectations. this is what I meant about looking in that earlier response.

Also, my guide recently told me she worked with this exercise alone for around 4 months (not consistently).
I would keep using this one, but I will give you another exercise to work with later on..

I think I’d be fine with uncertainty about what I am. I’d prefer to have certainty about what I am not

This is ALL that is required. Wanting to know what you are is just more thought content (what you are not).
It's a relief when you realise you don't have to know what you are.

I guess the me that exists only in thought. I see that it exists only in thought

This is an important milestone. It has more significance than you realise. The inquiry is important to corner-off the illusion of where the self (apparently) exists.

but I don’t feel like that negates its existence on a deeper level.

It's (the me's) existence? or just existence?
Is there not just life happening?
There is a presence, not separate from the looking, here that is undeniable - You would not be reading these words otherwise.

Is there any connection between this 'me' and the existence of life, happening now?

Also, when you use the word 'feel' what do you mean? Do you actually feel something? or is this only a thought?

Discerning the difference between thought (fantasy) and sensation (experience) is important.

This still seems too conceptual.

The only thing that is making this conceptual is your mind. Wanting to understand this. Going down that road will just give you more thoughts. its a road which oscillates between doubt and belief. It's the wrong way.

I meant to ask at the end if the mistake I’m making is by identifying with the awareness.

You have to find that out. The only way is to look for yourself.

You can ask yourself:

What difference does it make to 'you' if you know this or not?

Can you even know what awareness is without making it into a thought form?

What is perceiving that 'awareness'?

Am I identifying with awareness? or is thought identifying as ME?