The Gate

I was rushing with answering yesterdays questions, trying to keep all the answers in one reply box became a rush, rather than taking time with answering each one, which felt less of a hurry. I understand now there were other options like writing the answers in notebook first and then pasting it all at once. that's something I can do in future. Thanks for the questions be back later with the answers. Shelly

Hi Shelly...you are doing great! Just breathe. Take a deep breath and take your time and have some fun with this all.

Love, Kay

Thanks Kay! :)






What is the AE of ear? Close the eyes and drop all thoughts and images about the ear and what is the actual experience?

its a sensation

Yes, exactly. So can an ear be found at all?

No






Normally we believe that the sensation is coming from the sight, the ‘object’ seen (hand).

oh gosh yes. with eyes close paying attention only to the felt sensations of the hand there is just sensation that ends up not being anything and then with eyes open looking at the hand, the hand is colour/image and has no solidity or sensation of its own ...its a thought.

What is a thought? It’s not clear what you are referring to as a thought.

the label ear is a thought



repeating the exercise..it spreads to the arms chest lips and is the same way.

Are there actual experience of arms, chest, lips?

No, I was just using the labels to convey that it was the same with other parts of the body like the list





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

no I cant say that the sensation is coming from the sight. its truer in AE that its coming from thought, yes.

So it is only a thought that links the sensation with the sight of the hand ?

yes. in AE there is no dividing line with hand and sight, nor a label. only in thought the labels hand and sight pop up





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 like looking at the colour/image hand and also observing the felt sensation..the visual sight is not causing the sensation or holding it there nor is the sensation causing or holding the hand there?

You have a question mark. If you are not sure….please LOOK again and tell me what you find.

eyes closed, focusing on the felt sensations of raised hand without the label raied hand. there is no hand with closed eyes. theres sensation and that sensation doesnt say its a hand. in AE there is sensation. eyes open looking at the hand..its an image/colours its not the source of the sensation but the sensation still is. the sensation feels nothing like the image either, its not confined into fingers or a skin line or edge and the image is not projecting the senation. both are here with eyes open..image and sansation. the label my hand is a thought




its the same with every body part as with the hand


So you took your time and did this with every part suggested and did it a few times with each body part? It is only through LOOKING that the recognition that there is no separate individual is seen. These exercises are for that purpose.

I didnt look at everybody part three times each. I did the exercise three times with the hand and then did it briefly with other body parts.

there is sensation and there is colour/image.



Is there a sensation in mental images? And does any sensation suggest in any way that it is a person?
it seems like the sensation comes with the mental image as one movie with soundtrack. In AE no it does not suggest that is a person. only in thought



Okay…bring that entire concept to mind. Close the eyes and think the thought “There is a sense that I am a person” and find the feeling/sensation that goes with that thought and see the mental image….now watch carefully…..

…..exchange the thought “there is a sense that I am a person” with the thought/words “blahblahblah”….does the sensation remain or disappear? If it remains does that not mean that the sensation has nothing to do with the thought? If it did would not the sensation disappear as soon as the thought “there is a sense I am a person” disappears? Let me know what you find.


the mental image/thought continues and so does the feeling/sensation ..is it not an I sense then sorry thinking again.

Read what I wrote again…slowly and then redo the exercise and let me know what you find. If you're not sure always repeat the exercise a few times and then answer from AE. There is no rush to get to the end point of this exploration. This isn’t about how fast we can get to an end…where is the end exactly? Seeing through the illusory self has no time-frame. What helps is constant LOOKING.

Thank you. blah blah blah doesnt change the sensation or make it disapear.





Are you able to separate a thought from the “knowing” of it? Or separate a sound from the ‘knowing’ of it? Or separate a sensation from the ‘knowing’ of it...or they just ARE?

if the knowing of it means the knowing of something...that would be thought. there is sound, there is knowing sound...I cant grasp this question maybe sorry.

The knowing of something is thought. That would mean that there has to be a someone/something that is aware of/knowing of something. We are referring to AE, not thought. Everything is known. There is nothing that is not known. LOOK at what is known 'right now' – colour, sensation, sound, thought. There is nothing else to know. There is no past, present moment or future. There is nothing that is not already known.

Experience-er of experience is the same as knowing and known. When you look for the dividing line between knowing and known, do you find one?

ah I see. No I dont. In AE there is colour/sound/sensation/thought and they are known but there is no knower..oh. a thought says yes there is, its me. in AE that is thought. not an actual solid entity. so no. there is no knower in AE.

In actual experience is there a border (dividing line) where a thought stops, and the "knowing" of it starts? Are you able to separate a thought from the “knowing” of it? Are you able to separate sound, colour and so on from the ‘knowing” of it?

NO.





So can there be a division between 'knowing' (awareness) and what is 'known' (sound, taste, etc)?

yes there's been a lot of associations with that word and probably the concept of knowing and known previously. without a thought there's no known or knowing not till its pointed out as something in the first place?


Knowing and known does not refer to knowledge/intellect. It refers to WHAT IS.



I cant separate a smell from the knowing of it, they do seem to be simultaneous and I don't know their origin of either one.


Great! So what divides the experience-er of the smell and the experience of the smell? Can you find anything that divides experience-er from the experience?

no

oops I forgot to add the quotes. will do it now

What is the AE of ear? Close the eyes and drop all thoughts and images about the ear and what is the actual experience?

its a sensation

Yes, exactly. So can an ear be found at all?

No

Normally we believe that the sensation is coming from the sight, the ‘object’ seen (hand).

oh gosh yes. with eyes close paying attention only to the felt sensations of the hand there is just sensation that ends up not being anything and then with eyes open looking at the hand, the hand is colour/image and has no solidity or sensation of its own ...its a thought.

What is a thought? It’s not clear what you are referring to as a thought.

the label ear is a thought

repeating the exercise..it spreads to the arms chest lips and is the same way.

Are there actual experience of arms, chest, lips?

No, I was just using the labels to convey that it was the same with other parts of the body like with the list

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

no I cant say that the sensation is coming from the sight. its truer in AE that its coming from thought, yes.

So it is only a thought that links the sensation with the sight of the hand ?

yes. in AE there is no dividing line with hand and sight, nor a label. only in thought the labels hand and sight pop up

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 like looking at the colour/image hand and also observing the felt sensation. The visual sight is not causing the sensation or holding it there nor is the sensation causing or holding the hand there?

You have a question mark. If you are not sure….please LOOK again and tell me what you find.

eyes closed, focusing on the felt sensations of raised hand without the label raised hand. there is no hand with closed eyes. there's sensation and that sensation doesn't say its a hand. in AE there is sensation. eyes open looking at the hand. Its an image/colours its not the source of the sensation but the sensation still is. the sensation feels nothing like the image either, its not confined into fingers or a skin line or edge and the image is not projecting the sensation. both are here with eyes open. Image and sensation. the label my hand is a thought.its the same with every body part as with the hand

So you took your time and did this with every part suggested and did it a few times with each body part? It is only through LOOKING that the recognition that there is no separate individual is seen. These exercises are for that purpose.

I didn't look at everybody part three times each. I did the exercise three times with the hand and then did it briefly with other body parts.

there is sensation and there is colour/image.

Is there a sensation in mental images? And does any sensation suggest in any way that it is a person?
it seems like the sensation comes with the mental image as one movie with soundtrack. In AE no it does not suggest that is a person. only in thought



Okay…bring that entire concept to mind. Close the eyes and think the thought “There is a sense that I am a person” and find the feeling/sensation that goes with that thought and see the mental image….now watch carefully…..

…..exchange the thought “there is a sense that I am a person” with the thought/words “blahblahblah”….does the sensation remain or disappear? If it remains does that not mean that the sensation has nothing to do with the thought? If it did would not the sensation disappear as soon as the thought “there is a sense I am a person” disappears? Let me know what you find.

the mental image/thought continues and so does the feeling/sensation ..is it not an I sense then sorry thinking again.

Read what I wrote again…slowly and then redo the exercise and let me know what you find. If you're not sure always repeat the exercise a few times and then answer from AE. There is no rush to get to the end point of this exploration. This isn’t about how fast we can get to an end…where is the end exactly? Seeing through the illusory self has no time-frame. What helps is constant LOOKING.

Thank you. blah blah blah doesn't change the sensation or make it disappear.




No I don't. In AE there is colour/sound/sensation/thought and they are known but there is no knower without thought popping up about a knower.

Are you able to separate a thought from the “knowing” of it? Or separate a sound from the ‘knowing’ of it? Or separate a sensation from the ‘knowing’ of it...or they just ARE?

if the knowing of it means the knowing of something...that would be thought. there is sound, there is knowing sound...I cant grasp this question maybe sorry.

The knowing of something is thought. That would mean that there has to be a someone/something that is aware of/knowing of something. We are referring to AE, not thought. Everything is known. There is nothing that is not known. LOOK at what is known 'right now' – colour, sensation, sound, thought. There is nothing else to know. There is no past, present moment or future. There is nothing that is not already known.

Experience-er of experience is the same as knowing and known. When you look for the dividing line between knowing and known, do you find one?

a thought . in AE that is thought. not an actual solid entity. so no. there is no knower in AE.

In actual experience is there a border (dividing line) where a thought stops, and the "knowing" of it starts? Are you able to separate a thought from the “knowing” of it? Are you able to separate sound, colour and so on from the ‘knowing” of it?

NO.

So can there be a division between 'knowing' (awareness) and what is 'known' (sound, taste, etc)?

yes there's been a lot of associations with that word and probably the concept of knowing and known previously. without a thought there's no known or knowing not till its pointed out as something in the first place?


Knowing and known does not refer to knowledge/intellect. It refers to WHAT IS.



I cant separate a smell from the knowing of it, they do seem to be simultaneous and I don't know their origin of either one.


Great! So what divides the experience-er of the smell and the experience of the smell? Can you find anything that divides experience-er from the experience?

no

nearly every expectation on the list was and in most cases is still there in expectations. Just re-reading them..most of them are still active.

I was guided previously by Ilona. It seemed clear but I was just really trying hard to believe it/convince myself. It didnt last very long. There must be a big amount of expectation deception denial conditioning ..the hand exercise was profound but quickly became another thing i've done for the next rung up

Hey Shelly

Normally we believe that the sensation is coming from the sight, the ‘object’ seen (hand).
oh gosh yes. with eyes close paying attention only to the felt sensations of the hand there is just sensation that ends up not being anything and then with eyes open looking at the hand, the hand is colour/image and has no solidity or sensation of its own ...its a thought.

What is a thought? It’s not clear what you are referring to as a thought.

the label ear is a thought

Okay great! Thanks for clarifying it. So the label hand is a thought…yes :)

So it is only a thought that links the sensation with the sight of the hand ?

yes. in AE there is no dividing line with hand and sight, nor a label. only in thought the labels hand and sight pop up

Labels and thoughts are one in the same.

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 like looking at the colour/image hand and also observing the felt sensation..the visual sight is not causing the sensation or holding it there nor is the sensation causing or holding the hand there?

You have a question mark. If you are not sure….please LOOK again and tell me what you find.

eyes closed, focusing on the felt sensations of raised hand without the label raied hand. there is no hand with closed eyes. theres sensation and that sensation doesnt say its a hand. in AE there is sensation. eyes open looking at the hand..its an image/colours its not the source of the sensation but the sensation still is. the sensation feels nothing like the image either, its not confined into fingers or a skin line or edge and the image is not projecting the senation. both are here with eyes open..image and sansation. the label my hand is a thought

Wow…awesome LOOKING! :) So it is very clear then that what is seen is not creating the sensation. Wonderful!

I didnt look at everybody part three times each. I did the exercise three times with the hand and then did it briefly with other body parts.
there is sensation and there is colour/image.

No problems…as long as you are clear on what the exercise was about :)

Is there a sensation in mental images? And does any sensation suggest in any way that it is a person?

Read what I wrote again…slowly and then redo the exercise and let me know what you find. If you're not sure always repeat the exercise a few times and then answer from AE. There is no rush to get to the end point of this exploration. This isn’t about how fast we can get to an end…where is the end exactly? Seeing through the illusory self has no time-frame. What helps is constant LOOKING.

Thank you. blah blah blah doesnt change the sensation or make it disapear.

Great…so can a thought create a sensation? Can a mental image create a sensation?
Are you able to separate a thought from the “knowing” of it? Or separate a sound from the ‘knowing’ of it? Or separate a sensation from the ‘knowing’ of it...or they just ARE?

if the knowing of it means the knowing of something...that would be thought. there is sound, there is knowing sound...I cant grasp this question maybe sorry.

The knowing of something is thought. That would mean that there has to be a someone/something that is aware of/knowing of something. We are referring to AE, not thought. Everything is known. There is nothing that is not known. LOOK at what is known 'right now' – colour, sensation, sound, thought. There is nothing else to know. There is no past, present moment or future. There is nothing that is not already known.

Experience-er of experience is the same as knowing and known. When you look for the dividing line between knowing and known, do you find one?

ah I see. No I dont. In AE there is colour/sound/sensation/thought and they are known but there is no knower..oh. a thought says yes there is, its me. in AE that is thought. not an actual solid entity. so no. there is no knower in AE.

Nice! So it is clear there is no division between what is knowing and what is known? That there is only the knowingknown which is experience itself and soundtastesensationthoughtcoloursmell are ‘made up of’ experience (knowingknown)?

Yes, thought will pop up and say…’yes me’. But the ‘yes me’ is just another thought appearing amidst a stream of thought.

In actual experience is there a border (dividing line) where a thought stops, and the "knowing" of it starts? Are you able to separate a thought from the “knowing” of it? Are you able to separate sound, colour and so on from the ‘knowing” of it?

NO.

That’s a resounding ‘no’ then (smiling) Nice :)

Great! So what divides the experience-er of the smell and the experience of the smell? Can you find anything that divides experience-er from the experience?

No

Great! :)

There is a belief that labels have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’. But they don't. It is a generally accepted belief that labels like ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are inherent characteristics of ‘things’. But actually, they are not.

Here is an interesting exercise in how labels do not have a one-to-one correspondence with reality:

When you look at the word label ‘GREEN’, what is the actual experience?
Is the colour red experienced, or is the colour green experienced as the label suggests?
Do the labels have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’?
Or do the labels suggest something else other than what is here and now (red colour)?
Is green-ness inherent attributes of the experience of the colour red, or is green just a word label on the experience of the colour red?

If the label ‘GREEN’ is replaced with the label ‘GOOD’ or ‘BAD’, is the redness affected in any way as the labels suggests?
Does redness become ‘good’ or ‘bad’, or do the labels have no effect whatsoever on ‘reality’?

Love, Kay

Thanks Kay.

Yes, thought will pop up and say…’yes me’. But the ‘yes me’ is just another thought appearing amidst a stream of thought.

its really helpful to hear it put so plainly.

Great…so can a thought create a sensation? Can a mental image create a sensation?
Are you able to separate a thought from the “knowing” of it? Or separate a sound from the ‘knowing’ of it? Or separate a sensation from the ‘knowing’ of it...or they just ARE?

If a thought appears about a scenario, that seems to have emotion/sensation/feeling with it, so I don't know if a thought can create sensation as in emotion of sorrow or anger but I also get that the hand exercise..the looking and the sensation were not generating each other. I cant say there is no emotion or feeling with a thought because there is in my experience, even if its not generated by the thought and I don't know anything about it.{maybe I am misunderstanding the question}

I get that a sensation and a thought are inseperable from the knowing..they just are. I cant find a line or a start

So it is clear there is no division between what is knowing and what is known? That there is only the knowingknown which is experience itself and soundtastesensationthoughtcoloursmell are ‘made up of’ experience (knowingknown)?

I cant find a division in knowing and what is known

When you look at the word label ‘GREEN’, what is the actual experience?
Is the colour red experienced, or is the colour green experienced as the label suggests?
Do the labels have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’?
Or do the labels suggest something else other than what is here and now (red colour)?
Is green-ness inherent attributes of the experience of the colour red, or is green just a word label on the experience of the colour red?

If the label ‘GREEN’ is replaced with the label ‘GOOD’ or ‘BAD’, is the redness affected in any way as the labels suggests?
Does redness become ‘good’ or ‘bad’, or do the labels have no effect whatsoever on ‘reality’?

a label good or bad doesn't make the actual good or bad. if I label a dog good or bad it doesn't make that dog become something that's good or bad now that it has a label on it that says bad so its a word but the word is not the actual.

The actual experience of the word label green is red, even though the word says green. The label is not referring to reality, as the reality at this moment is red. the word green doesn't make reality (red) become green

[

quote]


Yes, thought will pop up and say…’yes me’. But the ‘yes me’ is just another thought appearing amidst a stream of thought.


its really helpful to hear it put so plainly.

[/quote]

one of the expectations was that there wouldn't be anymore thoughts of identity.

Yes, thought will pop up and say…’yes me’. But the ‘yes me’ is just another thought appearing amidst a stream of thought.


its really helpful to hear it put so plainly.

I expected thoughts of identity or stickiness to stop or something, or have a quiet mind whatever that is, as I cant actually even imagine what that would look like.

so the thought will pop up and say 'yes me' but the yes me is just another thought appearing amidst a stream of thought.

that's simple enough but the thought feels so strong, hypnotic at times, not even awareness of the engagement happening. so what good does it do, like a shark has sharp teeth that's good to know but fall in and that don't stop the bite. where is the freedom...that the bites not happening to anyone it just really feels like it is?

Hello Shelly,

Yes, thought will pop up and say…’yes me’. But the ‘yes me’ is just another thought appearing amidst a stream of thought.

its really helpful to hear it put so plainly.

Find a quiet place and sit for about 10 minutes. Close your eyes and just notice thoughts. Don’t try and do anything with them…just notice what thoughts appear.

(1) Notice the current thought that is present.
Like when you sit observing the body, a thought might arise “this is my feet” or “here is a pain” or “my breathing is too quick” or “I am bored with this exercise” or “I have better things to do” or any sorts of thoughts.

(2) This thought will pass and another thought will come. So just observe this thought passing.

(3) Then wait for the next thought to come.

(4) When the next thought is present, just notice it, and see how it passes.

(5) Then wait for the next thought to come.

(6) Repeat #4 and #5 many-many times.

You can do this throughout your day as well.

Can you find a gap in between thoughts?
Can you see where one thought ends and another thought begins?

Great…so can a thought create a sensation? Can a mental image create a sensation?

If a thought appears about a scenario, that seems to have emotion/sensation/feeling with it, so I don't know if a thought can create sensation as in emotion of sorrow or anger but I also get that the hand exercise..the looking and the sensation were not generating each other. I cant say there is no emotion or feeling with a thought because there is in my experience, even if its not generated by the thought and I don't know anything about it.{maybe I am misunderstanding the question}

You are thinking and not LOOKING.

What is it exactly that is experiencing emotions/feelings? Please find that someone/something and describe them to me in precise detail.

Give me a step-by-step description on how a thought creates a sensation and how a sensation knows to appear when particular thoughts or scenarios arise.

The purpose of the blahblahblah exercise was for you to see that by replacing a thought that is supposedly creating feelings/emotions/sensations, then the sensations should disappear when the thought disappears. But you saw for yourself that the sensations still continued when replacing a ‘distressing’ thought with blahblahblah, so how can a thought create a sensation?

Not only that, there are a few of assumptions here.
1) That there is a body and that the body experiences sensations/feelings.
2) That someone/something is thinking thoughts
2) That separation is real because something can cause something in something else (belief in cause and effect and the belief in object/subject split)
3) And the belief in time.

When you look at the word label 'GREEN’, what is the actual experience?
Is the colour red experienced, or is the colour green experienced as the label suggests?
Do the labels have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’?
Or do the labels suggest something else other than what is here and now (red colour)?
Is green-ness inherent attributes of the experience of the colour red, or is green just a word label on the experience of the colour red?

If the label ‘GREEN’ is replaced with the label ‘GOOD’ or ‘BAD’, is the redness affected in any way as the labels suggests?

Does redness become ‘good’ or ‘bad’, or do the labels have no effect whatsoever on ‘reality’?

I would like for you to answer each of these questions in blue individually please.

Yes, thought will pop up and say…’yes me’. But the ‘yes me’ is just another thought appearing amidst a stream of thought.

one of the expectations was that there wouldn't be anymore thoughts of identity.

There was no separate individual/person before this exploration started and there is still no separate person reading this now. So why would thoughts of identity disappear?

Thought doesn't stop telling you that it's your car, your job, your body, your craving, your preference, your pain, your happiness, your this and your that. Why would thoughts that ‘say’ that stop appearing? It's never been any other way.

I expected thoughts of identity or stickiness to stop or something, or have a quiet mind whatever that is, as I cant actually even imagine what that would look like.

so the thought will pop up and say 'yes me' but the yes me is just another thought appearing amidst a stream of thought.

that's simple enough but the thought feels so strong, hypnotic at times, not even awareness of the engagement happening. so what good does it do, like a shark has sharp teeth that's good to know but fall in and that don't stop the bite. where is the freedom...that the bites not happening to anyone it just really feels like it is?

Yes..YOU EXPECTED = expectations of what will happen, when it will happen, how it will happen, what it will look like, feel like, be like etc. We talked about this in the beginning. Expectations hinder LOOKING and hinder SEEING because there is an idea of how it should be.

You have already seen several times that there is no separate individual/person. You have also already seen that there is no one who resides in the body and that there is no body. You have seen that you don’t control thoughts, choose thoughts or decide what thoughts to have. I give you exercises that you can LOOK....to take your time and LOOK. The more you LOOK the clearer it becomes and with clarity comes recognition. I can't do anymore than what I am doing Shelly..I can only point and you can only LOOK and when the penny drops it drops.

So I can’t tell you when the penny is actually going to drop. You can keep asking me when or how or where and I can’t tell you that. It’s not in my control…nor is it in yours. There is no ‘me’ or ‘you’…so who has control and have you LOOKED to see what it is that is WANTING something?

Are you LOOKING all day everyday…and not just when you have to answer my questions. Are you putting everything that you have seen so far and LOOKED at so far to good use by continually LOOKING?

This is a process. Some see quickly, others don’t actually see through the illusory self until right at the end. You have only seen clearly the difference between a the face-value of a thought and the content of thought. We haven't looked at control, time, the body or memory yet.

Does the word (= thought) suffering contains any actual suffering?
Does the word 'suffering' have any meaning at all?
So what exactly is it that is suffering because they aren’t ‘getting it’ yet?

Love, Kay

Find a quiet place and sit for about 10 minutes. Close your eyes and just notice thoughts. Don’t try and do anything with them…just notice what thoughts appear.

(1) Notice the current thought that is present.
Like when you sit observing the body, a thought might arise “this is my feet” or “here is a pain” or “my breathing is too quick” or “I am bored with this exercise” or “I have better things to do” or any sorts of thoughts.

(2) This thought will pass and another thought will come. So just observe this thought passing.

(3) Then wait for the next thought to come.

(4) When the next thought is present, just notice it, and see how it passes.

(5) Then wait for the next thought to come.

(6) Repeat #4 and #5 many-many times.

You can do this throughout your day as well.

Can you find a gap in between thoughts?
Can you see where one thought ends and another thought begins?

thanks Kay, and for the rest of the post. will report back later. shelly

After reading the last post I tried writing down whats stopping the looking and what is written says:

Whats stopping me from looking?

I'm looking as the thought. I understand its not up to you to look.
And i cant make looking happen. what is trying is a thought and it doesnt click that that means theres no person. Like thats been repeated over and over but it doesnt crack through past the engagement with thought of personhood.

its like a dire loop. but then the exercises show that it is none of that too. there needs to be more focus to look when npt answering yes

but i'm never going to make it happen if what i am is a thought. and for all the years books teachings words none of that has done a thing. just looking in thought thinking thats looking.

Can you find a gap in between thoughts?
Can you see where one thought ends and another thought begins?

there is sensation happening, sound, then a thought so yes there are gaps

I cant say where one thought ends and another begins.

What is it exactly that is experiencing emotions/feelings?

you said when this was answered last time that I was thinking, not LOOKING. it feels like when I am looking and not thinking there is something wrong or false, like a resistance there.


Nothing is experiencing emotions/feelings.

Please find that someone/something and describe them to me in precise detail.

there is just the sensations/thought/feeling/emotion but no owner

Give me a step-by-step description on how a thought creates a sensation and how a sensation knows to appear when particular thoughts or scenarios arise.

I cant

When you look at the word label 'GREEN’, what is the actual experience?

red word that says green

Is the colour red experienced, or is the colour green experienced as the label suggests?

the colour red is experienced

Do the labels have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’?

no. the word green on a piece of paper doesn't make the paper green its a word

Or do the labels suggest something else other than what is here and now (red colour)?

the label suggests something other than what is here{red}

Is green-ness inherent attributes of the experience of the colour red, or is green just a word label on the experience of the colour red?

the word Green is not the colour green. so if the word green is written on a red piece of paper it wont make the paper turn green, the paper is red

If the label ‘GREEN’ is replaced with the label ‘GOOD’ or ‘BAD’, is the redness affected in any way as the labels suggests?

no the red is unaffected whatever word is written

Does redness become ‘good’ or ‘bad’, or do the labels have no effect whatsoever on ‘reality’?

redness does not become good or bad. the labels good or bad have no effect on reality

Yes..YOU EXPECTED = expectations of what will happen, when it will happen, how it will happen, what it will look like, feel like, be like etc. We talked about this in the beginning. Expectations hinder LOOKING and hinder SEEING because there is an idea of how it should be.

You have already seen several times that there is no separate individual/person. You have also already seen that there is no one who resides in the body and that there is no body. You have seen that you don’t control thoughts, choose thoughts or decide what thoughts to have. I give you exercises that you can LOOK....to take your time and LOOK. The more you LOOK the clearer it becomes and with clarity comes recognition. I can't do anymore than what I am doing Shelly..I can only point and you can only LOOK and when the penny drops it drops.

So I can’t tell you when the penny is actually going to drop. You can keep asking me when or how or where and I can’t tell you that. It’s not in my control…nor is it in yours. There is no ‘me’ or ‘you’…so who has control and have you LOOKED to see what it is that is WANTING something?

Are you LOOKING all day everyday…and not just when you have to answer my questions. Are you putting everything that you have seen so far and LOOKED at so far to good use by continually LOOKING?

This is a process. Some see quickly, others don’t actually see through the illusory self until right at the end. You have only seen clearly the difference between a the face-value of a thought and the content of thought. We haven't looked at control, time, the body or memory yet.

Thanks for the opportunity to look at these things

Does the word (= thought) suffering contains any actual suffering?

no

Does the word 'suffering' have any meaning at all?

not in AE

So what exactly is it that is suffering because they aren’t ‘getting it’ yet?

It is a passing thought