The Gate

I would like a guide please.

I found this site after seeing a video about a website that helps people get "liberated". I came on read the book and just downloaded the app. (I have an apple phone so downloaded it on here) The app asked some questions about expectations and what I want so I'll post what I wrote:

How will awakening make me feel? I don't expect awakening to make me feel a certain way.
What will it be like?
There will be a clear understanding what the words “I”, “me”, “my” point to and whether that which they point to is imaginary or real.
What do I want it to be like?
I want there to be an end to a chronic sense of dissatisfaction.

Hi, you landed in one of my threads and Bill has moved it here.

Can you commit to coming back each day and following a line of enquiry to conclusion?

Start by looking at what makes you unique.

Talk more about the dissatisfaction.

Hello Mark.

I can commit to coming back each day and following a line of inquiry to conclusion.

When I wrote about dissatisfaction I was remembering how there is a desperate quality into looking into this. Not just here but in other venues. Something about seeing this clearly will satisfy a need to know or maybe just dissolve it. I just realized that this dissatisfaction wasn't about getting to the truth originally. It led to that but that came later. It was originally about a vague sense of dissatisfaction without any real idea about what is missing. I don't know if being clear about what the word "I" is labeling and if what it points to is in real life has anything to do with this. If it doesn't at least it will be scratched off the list.

What makes me unique? Can you be more specific or do you want a list of unique traits?

And thank you - like a lot - for taking the time for this. It is really important.

Oh also I'm sorry for bumping into another thread. I thought that was just a place to announce being new here.

I can commit to coming back each day and following a line of inquiry to conclusion.

Okay cool.

When I wrote about dissatisfaction I was remembering how there is a desperate quality into looking into this. Not just here but in other venues. Something about seeing this clearly will satisfy a need to know or maybe just dissolve it.

Sometimes it can seem to, but don't get caught in that because it can become yet another expectation or be a goal for being here. If it becomes a benchmark or point of comparison for how you are doing, it slows things down. Don't compare any state encountered here to any previous state, or to anyone else's experience. This is why LU does one person one thread.

I just realized that this dissatisfaction wasn't about getting to the truth originally. It led to that but that came later. It was originally about a vague sense of dissatisfaction without any real idea about what is missing. I don't know if being clear about what the word "I" is labeling and if what it points to is in real life has anything to do with this. If it doesn't at least it will be scratched off the list.

No, the two are very much linked and dissatisfaction is an effect of the cause "something is missing". It is part of the human condition. Don't worry it will become clear.

What makes me unique? Can you be more specific or do you want a list of unique traits?

A place to start looking is at what makes you a you. When you think about yourself, how do you define you?

Distinct could be another word for unique - as in - how do you distinguish yourself from other?

The "me" bit? Are you a body, a mind, a spirit or soul, all of those, or none of those?

Have you checked to see if the you that you think of as you even exists?

Have you ever heard the phrase "Simon is really in his element when he is..."

How about you when you are in your element, when you are really being yourself?

What is that like?

What is the state of being?

When you are really yourself are you being happy?

Are you being charismatic?

What is it for you?

What observations are made about you?

You may already have answers to these things but have another look at this chapter of your story, because each of these layers is a bit like a mask.

In ancient Rome, the word "persona" (Latin) or "prosopon" (πρόσωπον: Greek) originally referred to the masks worn by actors on stage.

So this is about peeling off each layer of personality, until there is nothing left.

If this is done systematically, there won't be any circular definitions left and it should be easy to get this.

And thank you - like a lot - for taking the time for this. It is really important.

No problem :-)

When you think about yourself, how do you define you?

Distinct could be another word for unique - as in - how do you distinguish yourself from other?

The "me" bit? Are you a body, a mind, a spirit or soul, all of those, or none of those?

Definitely this body. The mind or stream of thoughts is just part of that. I don't know much about souls or spirits. What makes me unique is like asking what makes this body unique. Actually no it isn't. If somebody asked me what makes my body unique I'd give him a list of unique characteristics. like how many centimeters it is and blood type and facial structure and fingerprints. If they asked me what makes me unique I'd give those physical qualities but also behavioral patterns and thought patterns and likes and dislikes. Those also are qualities unique to this body but the question what makes your body unique is asking what makes the physical structure of the body unique not the non-physical parts. I can go into what makes something physical and non-physical but that feels like it might be a side track.

Have you checked to see if the you that you think of as you even exists?

Yes and it does. It's sitting on the floor typing on a laptop.

Have you ever heard the phrase "Simon is really in his element when he is..."

How about you when you are in your element, when you are really being yourself?

I've heard this notion before but I took it to mean when somebody is in a situation they're really skilled at handling and enjoy. I didn't take it to mean that they're more themselves. I can list some situations like that but they're not always enjoyable and there are times I'm less skilled. Anyhow I don't feel more myself in those situations. I never feel more or less myself though I've acted in ways to hide my desires and feelings and habits.

When you are really yourself are you being happy?

So places I've been in my element is at the karaoke bar. I was happier in general but I didn't feel more myself than when I'm miserable having a bad day at a job. When I'm really myself it just means there is less trying to hide or suppress the expression of emotions and thoughts. I'm not less myself then, there is just a suppression element added on top. But the fear that leads to that happening is also part of me.

Are you being charismatic?

Maybe but I may be less likable as well.

What is it for you?

I think I've sufficiently described what being in my element means for me.

What observations are made about you?

By others? I can speculate on this. He's happy. He sings well. He dances well. He looks to be enjoying himself. In general those are my observations too.

Is your body you? or is it just a body?

Are your behavioural patterns you? or are they just behavioural patterns?

You say what you think of as you is sitting on the floor typing on a laptop?

Are you? sitting on a floor typing on a laptop? or is there just sitting on the floor typing on a laptop?

What is the quality of singing karaoke?

Is it a feeling?

Is it fulfilling?

When you think about you, what overall quality comes to mind?

Is there more or less of it when at a karaoke bar?

What is your favourite song?

Who chose it?

Why?

Is your body you? or is it just a body?

Is this body me? How is this body me more than the computer here? What makes it me? The sensations in it are felt. The feeling of this leg is felt and these hands typing. Does that make it me? If the computer could be felt like the body and the body could only be seen like the computer without feeling would the computer be me? Yes. The word me would attach itself to the computer instead of to this body. If thought called the computer me instead of this body would that make it so? No. So if thought calls this body me does that make it so? No.

Are your behavioural patterns you? or are they just behavioural patterns?

No. For the same reason above. Thought has arbitrarily called those behavior patterns me.

You say what you think of as you is sitting on the floor typing on a laptop?

I didn't say that, thought said that. And I'm not a thing that makes thought happen.

Are you? sitting on a floor typing on a laptop? or is there just sitting on the floor typing on a laptop?

There is this body sitting on a floor typing on a laptop. The body has been labelled me in thought. But that doesn't make it so.

What is the quality of singing karaoke?

Music and rhythm running through this body.

Is it a feeling?

Yes.

Is it fulfilling?

Sometimes.

When you think about you, what overall quality comes to mind?

This body. Still even after seeing it as arbitrary above. So if the body was just gone from experience where would the me be? Maybe to the fact of experience. There is experience here. Is experience me? No it wouldn't do that. Thought would say me is a thing that is aware of experience or me is some part of experience. It wouldn't say I am experience. There's just too much there. So is there a thing that is aware of experience? There is sound happening right now. Is there a thing aware of it? No. There's just sound happening. Now when I think ("I" think?) of me it goes to the body still but there is a sense of "sure you can call this thing 'me' as much as you can call the computer 'me'".

Is there more or less of it when at a karaoke bar?

It's about the same based on memory. It's been awhile since I've sang karaoke.

What is your favourite song?

My favorite song is Heavenly Action by Erasure.

Who chose it?

It wasn't chosen. It's just the one I like the most right now.

Why?

Why do I like it the most? I can give you some guesses about what qualities make me like it but I won't be able to tell you why I like those qualities. Do you want a list?

So who are you then?

When the reference "I, me or self" gets used in language/life - who, what, where is it?

Report on the facts

There is no you

Saying you can see you are not you is a logical argument which points where?

How is all this happening?

Deciding?

Who is doing it?

And yes, do a list.

What are the qualities?

The song gets picked so how?

By whom?

Let's go deep into reality

What are the fine details?

So who are you then?

I don't know. Every time there is the urge to use the word "I","me", or "my", I'm going to look to see what that word is referring to. So it happened twice there: "I don't know" and "I'm going to look to see what that word is referring to"

"I don't know." What is "I" referring to there? A thing that can know and doesn't. Okay so what is knowing? When thought accurately portrays experience. Okay. So is there a thing that can possess accurate thoughts? So a sound just happened and the thought said, "a car just went by." That thought get's categorized as "true". It might not be but that's what happens. So is there a thing that possessed that process? No. It happened as part of experience. It came out of nowhere and went back to nowhere like the transporter in Star Trek except faster. So there is no me that can or can't know what me is.

"I'm going to look to see what that word is referring to." What is "I" referring to in that sentence? A thing that can look at what words are referring to. So what does looking mean there? It means focusing on words and what objects they refer to. What is focusing? When a feature in experience becomes a central feature. Okay. So is there a thing that makes looking/focusing happen? Intent maybe. What is intent? Right now there is an intent to answer this question. What is that? It's a trying. Clearer. Energy directed a certain way. Okay so energy directed a certain way makes looking/focusing happen. Does the word "I" refer to directed energy? No. It refers more to a director of the directed energy, a director of intent. Is there a thing directing intent? What is the intention right now? To answer this questio. Okay is there a thing making that intention happen right now? There is a desire to know and is there a thing making the intention to answer this question happen? No. The desire directs then intention. Does I refer to a desire? No. So "I'm going to look to see what that word is referring to" isn't true. There isn't anything looking/focusing or making that happen either.

Something interesting. During that last investigation when seeing the labels come up for different things - apple, tree, I - and seeing the picture of what the label referred to, no corresponding picture came up for the word "I".

There is really no knowledge coming up to meet the question "Who are you?"

When the reference "I, me or self" gets used in language/life - who, what, where is it?

The reference or what the reference refers to? The reference is a thought. Where does thought happen? Here? Here is the best description for where. Not here in this room but here as an aspect of this experience.

What does the reference refer to? I don't know. I'm too lazy to look at this and the previous sentence to see what I refers to. I, me, and self will be continually used out of habit. But right now there is no knowledge of what they refer to.

Saying you can see you are not you is a logical argument which points where?

That isn't a logical argument. Saying I can see I'm not me is illogical. It proposes that me is a thing which sees. Then it says me isn't me. Maybe it illogically points out there is experience but no way to prove there is a me part of that or outside of that.

How is all this happening?

How is experience happening? Spontaneously. That's even a bit of an assumption. It is happening. Right now how is a bit of speculation.

Deciding?

Two or more scenario's happen in thought. One looks most appealing, then energy gets directed (intention happens) toward making that happen.

Who is doing it?

Who is doing deciding? Thought comes out of nowhere so no one is making that happen. One scenario of thought looking more appealing than another happens. It's not that one scenario becomes more appealing, it's just one is. Energy being directed toward the most appealing scenario - that's just the definition of "appealing". It attracts energy. Unless the most appealing scenario is to avoid spending energy. So no one.

And yes, do a list. What are the qualities?

I recognized that the qualities that make Heavenly Action my favourite song aren't actually part of the song. The rhythm and melody and sound of the singers voice bring up feelings of joy, love, and fun. Those are the qualities that make that song my favourite.

The song gets picked so how? By whom?

At the bar the song comes up in thought or it's in a list. It's the most attractive song and energy gets directed toward asking the karaoke host to play it for my turn. The thoughts happen by themselves and one of the songs being more attractive than another is part of that. The directed energy (intent) is being directed by whats most attractive in the moment. It gets picked by circumstance. or by no one.

Let's go deep into reality. What are the fine details?

This seems detailed enough for now. I can't really say there is no me not because I can see one but because I don't really know what that word is truly referring to. This has been insightful. I really appreciate your help with this.

I isn't referring to a thing that can know and doesn't.

There isn't a thing that can know and doesn't.

There is knowing and not knowing.

Don't worry about trying to work this out in language, when the process is finished you will still use I in sentences.

Language and logic are great fun to play with but this is not where to look. This is not a logic game. The thing negating itself as the thing doesn't really work in logic.

The experience of I is an illusion.

It becomes clear in the mind bogglingly nonsensical.

The mind (or thought stream) places the experience of I at the source of all experience.

The common sense world view is, "it is happening to me".

The direct experience of it is, "it is happening and this experience is a part of it".

What is being talked about here shows up spontaneously.

This is not about taking something away. It is about recognising something that appears to be there never was there.

You can see a reflection in a mirror but (in this culture) we don't think of it as another me.

Can you see the part of you that you think of as "I, me or self" was never here at all?

Then there is the ability to have the experience (which is everything) and there can be this sense of you which seems impossible to pin point.

But is it possible to find a you that is separate from reality (everything that gets experienced)?

Beyond the assumption of you?

Your answers are very open with little resistance, perhaps it can be seen very easily that nothing runs the show?

Try and pin point the experience of an I which seems separate to what is just happening, chase the last remnants of it, see what it identifies with.

The idea to work this out in language was to get clear about what I think/feel I am. I'm not into logic games at all actually. I just thought if I could get a better sense of what I feel I am, then it would be easier to compare that to reality. It's an onerous task to check every "I" and "me".

The mind (or thought stream) places the experience of I at the source of all experience.

This is the difficulty. It's hard to find what part of experience is the "I" experience.

The common sense world view is, "it is happening to me".

Is experience happening to me? Experience isn't going to something. It appears and disappears right here. Like the Star Trek transporter. That actually might be a bad metaphor. It's assumed that the transporter sends things to and from places. It's just the immediate experience is spontaneous appearances.

The direct experience of it is, "it is happening and this experience is a part of it".

The direct experience is that it's happening. Direct experience really is a redundant phrase. There is experience. That's reality.

This is not about taking something away. It is about recognising something that appears to be there never was there.

Yeah I get that. It's just it's hard to even get a sense of the appearance. Like with santa claus there is a guy in a red suit with presents in a bag. That's clear. That thought-image can be seen and reality can be compared to it. It's quite obvious he's just not there. The word "I" doesn't have such a clear appearance to compare reality to.

Can you see the part of you that you think of as "I, me or self" was never here at all?

No. Not because I've found me is/was here, it's just hard to sense what I think of as me. It's vague. It jumps around. Sometimes it's the location in my torso or the location behind my eyes. Sometimes it's this "watcher" or experiencer of experience. Sometimes it feels like a director of experience, well it never feels like all of experience, but a director of some portion. The body locations are there but saying I'm those locations would be like saying the carpet is me because it feels like it. The watcher or experiencer isn't there - and never was - at all in experience and there is no way to look outside experience. The director of experience completely falls apart when it's seen how choice happens. I guess in all the places it feels like I is it isn't and can't be. It's just the sense of I is so vague that it's hard to nail it down to compare it with reality.

Then there is the ability to have the experience (which is everything) and there can be this sense of you which seems impossible to pin point.

That is exactly what is happening.

But is it possible to find a you that is separate from reality (everything that gets experienced)?

No. Not because it's not there (and I'm not saying it is) but because it's impossible to look outside of reality/experience.

Beyond the assumption of you?

No. All there is in experience is an assumption of me not an actual me.

nothing runs the show?

Yeah obviously.

Try and pin point the experience of an I which seems separate to what is just happening, chase the last remnants of it, see what it identifies with.

This is a great idea.

This is the difficulty. It's hard to find what part of experience is the "I" experience.

Because right now, it is probably most of it, so in a sense it is hiding itself in itself.

We sense that I by looking or thinking downwards or inwards.

When you are thinking about you, where are you looking?

Inside the body?

When you consider the idea "I am going to do X" does that thought reference a SPACE in the general area of the body?

It's a heavy "feeling" of attachment to the physical body.

It contracts the whole experience of life and makes it all about your SPACE.

And in your SPACE there will be a sense "it is happening to me".

It is a pretence.

Try this.

Imagine there is an I in an arbitrary object.

In the mind say "I am in this cup".

See what the reaction is.

When you are thinking about you, where are you looking? Inside the body?

Yeah. In my chest or behind my eyes and forehead.

When you consider the idea "I am going to do X" does that thought reference a SPACE in the general area of the body?

Yeah. just above the chest.

It's a heavy "feeling" of attachment to the physical body. It contracts the whole experience of life and makes it all about your SPACE.

"Heavy" is a bit dramatic. It's subtler than that. It definitely feels like that space of me is the most important. It's like everything is referenced to that. Or thought of in relation to it. Maybe not even thought of. It's more like just sensed in relation to this space.

And in your SPACE there will be a sense "it is happening to me".

Yeah. And the me is this space. This space is in experience or the sensation of the location is. But the sense is that some how experience is happening to it. Like it's somehow removed from the experience, having the experience - even though the experience is that this sensation of the location is an aspect of the experience.

Imagine there is an I in an arbitrary object. In the mind say "I am in this cup". See what the reaction is.

I did that with a pillow. All of the sudden what happens to or with this pillow becomes really, really important. There is a sense that what happens to this pillow is really important.

Excellent, all brilliant work.

Before the next part, have you stopped being the pillow?

If so, why?