Ready to dive in...

[ixturtle]

There is no path, or rather any step in any direction is the path.

mind doesn't quite believe you but heart wants to bow down and kiss your feet.

Clarity only exists because of fuzz (and vice versa)

so both clarity and fuzz wax and wane; they are objects (qualities) that exist within what's here, within awareness. like presence and non-presence. like expectations. i'm not sure how many times i have to see this to really "see" this. but i'm grateful to have this space to be reminded again and again.

i wonder if apple cores are your portal ?

ha ha ha! that's actually sort of why i asked. a sense that the truth we can't see is hidden behind the trivial that we assume to be. but i like your suggestion in any case. :-)

peace,
ix.

[ixturtle]

yesterday i came upon another "trivial portal" that has a MUCH bigger grip on me than apple cores... triggers me right off the deep end... i have so much judgement about it: "its not OK", and especially "not OK in my life", and i totally shut down. i can see it, but on some level the judgement is still "believed" and it seems impossible to do anything else with it.

and of course, that assumes that there is an "I" who is supposed to "DO" something with it...

sigh... just wanting to jump off this cliff once and for all...

[vinceschubert]

triggers me right off the deep end...

Usually these 'buttons' have layered stories. They often have to do with family of origin.
The thing to look for are the generalizations, then look behind these to more specific 'principles'.
The mind, of course, rationalizes, and produces 'reasons' why it is 'right' to feel this way.
Don't fight it. Don't look to suppress it. Be aware of the discomfort (or even pain) that arises when delving here. Welcome it as a misguided attempt to make life better for a naive child (even if it doesn't go back to childhood - it probably is a child's response)

[vinceschubert]

Rebecca, as far as your normal postings, just report anything significant. (what i think is significant) otherwise just read Roses' posts. You might take notes about what jumps out at you while reading them. i expect it will take a few days to get through them if you are cognizant of your reactions as you go. Do report any significant reactions. You can copy and paste the quotes you are reacting to. By reactions, i mean responses that 'shift' you Or that might 'shift' Rose.

[ixturtle]

Oy...

Was heading to sleep, but got up to post instead. Feeling "guilty" that I haven't made it through Rose's posts yet-- which is about fulfilling an agreement but also because I really want to be supportive (for both our sakes). Also feeling like a "slacker"-- like as much as there have been limitations in terms of computer access and family obligations and traveling this past week, i "should" be more on it-- like maybe it's just more "resistance" that gets in the way. Laying in bed, there was both a feeling that all of that is "story" and all that was actually "true" in that moment was me and bed and there is just what happens-- except in this case what happens is "story", "debate about "story"", awareness of alternative to "story" but nevertheless getting up to-- because "i want to at least stay present with this". It also brings up a fear I guess-- like if I dismiss all the mental rumblings as "story" then I let myself and everybody else down.

The alternative is to just let what happens happens-- which as i said, in this case means story arises, i get up, i write.

Definitely, in reading Rose's posts, i found myself both looking in new ways but more often just relaxing into the moment just as it was. Like when i could see where Rose was stuck, it somehow --for a moment-- allowed me to just relax and in effect, unstick for a few brief but blessed moments.

I have an early day tomorrow (more "story"), but here are some of the quotes I copied from Rose's string so far:

Rose: I was looking at the questions you sent me: "Keep looking to see if "me" can be found anywhere outside of the contents of a thought? Keep looking at the stories, are any of them true? " and "take a look at who or what it is that believes the thoughts, believes the stories?"

These struck me as key questions to keep at the center.

Ok, look at things that happen automatically, and things that you appear to be in control of, like decisions? What is the difference between the two? What is present when you appear to be in control, and not present when things appear to be automatic?

This is something I've touched on here but I appreciated how much she hammered away at this-- even after she said she "got it". Very helpful.

If the sense of self is a sense, or feeling,then what is sensing or feeling the sense of self? Does this make sense? Even the sense of self is an experience within awareness, just like fear, or desire, or an itchy foot.

Yes. I've seen this a number of times but it was helpful to see again in new way.

I dont believe that the strong sense is anything other than thoughts and feelings rebounding off each other.

Yes, I did some work with Scott Killoby that centers around exactly this: thoughts and feelings get velcro-d together in such a way that seem like a "self"...

Watch how the feelings and thoughts intensify. Or maybe they drop away. But notice how its all happening. You cant stop the thoughts, they are already there. You cant stop the feelings, they are already there. Are you doing any of it?

It mostly seems like I'm doing it because with increasing awareness, there's an increasing ability to see it and "choose" something else. Of course, this apparent choice can just be seen as new conditioning based on experience (like mindfulness practice, or participating on this site, etc). In other words not a choice at all. In tonight's case, the story one out because the conditioning "I must keep at it" and "I'm slacking" and "I must not let anyone down" won out.

i suggest that you develop a chuckle each time you catch yourself getting involved in living out a story.

as a professional chuckler, I was just happy to see this here.

To be able to "let things happen", we need to Not Touch the happening. Not distort it. Just Observing a happening will change it. To have opinions about the happening distorts it big time. Opinions are judgements that approve or disapprove and evoke strong emotion.

So this one really got me. Over and over again I "touch it"-- whatever it is. It seems to engage with life at all requires "touching it". To carry on a conversation with someone requires "touching it." This makes me want to go back to September when I was hiding out in a cabin in the woods...

GotIt wrote:or maybe I'm just a jerk! ;)

This is not possible. The "I'm" your talking about doesn't exist.
You can't lost what never existed.
No, it's not like shedding your skin. It might be more like always believing you had a hat on, only to discover one day that you never did. It was just a sensation that you interpreted as hat like.

Love the hat analogy... though the sunburn issue does make it a wee less apt!

OK-- now it seems the conditioned story is, "you've done your duty, now you can go to bed." (Yes, the story that i need to "work" at this to "get" this still lingers...) In any case, Hopefully tomorrow afternoon i'll have time to finish Rose's posts-- but even this projection of time is a "story." I know you said "life will dictate"...

[vinceschubert]

Like when i could see where Rose was stuck,

Do a paragraph on what you see...

Hopefully tomorrow afternoon i'll have time to finish Rose's posts

Waiting with bated breath. (no pressure meant)

[ixturtle]

ixturtle wrote:Like when i could see where Rose was stuck,

Do a paragraph on what you see...

On my flight south last week I came across a reference to a scene with Jack Nicholson in As Good As It Gets (which I haven't seen) when, totally frustrated he looks at a waiting room of miserable patients and says, "What if this is as good as it gets?" But this same question can be flipped on its head --- pointing to the notion that you keep hammering home: that This IS it! So last week in the midst of all the family stuff I kept reminding myself that "this is as good as it gets" and really sensing that in the midst of an intense headache or getting drawn into family drama or what have you, when you drop all stories, there is just an alive presence and that's enough. What this has to do with Rose's posts I'm not sure, except that as I had little bits of access to my dad's computer, I would read some of her string-- the insistence that she doesn't see, the contraction of the heart (with which I'm very familiar)-- and it kept reminding me to drop all story and just see that indeed, this moment just as it is IS "as good as it gets". And it always is. And it's a totally different joy than the joy related to outside circumstances because it doesn't depend on anything (except me noticing, which is a bit of a hiccup in all this perhaps, but anyway).

Meanwhile, life keeps dictating and I spent most of the day yesterday in the hospital with my partner's 88 year old mother. However, today I have declared a "bed in" and i'm not getting up until i finish Rose's posts.

But before I head to Rose's posts, I'm still struggling with the "not touching" what's here. Yesterday eve my partner was berating his mother over a family matter which was upsetting her greatly and I had a clear and strong "opinion" that this was totally inappropriate to put on a woman who was at her wit's end, so much so that she has fallen twice (breaking and then re-injuring her arm) in the last week. So I kept stepping in, giving my partner stern looks to back off and redirecting the conversation towards topics that I know are uplifting or cheering for her. I can see that my "opinion" is a conditioned response. I can see that my efforts to redirect were as well. And there is also a story that it was the "right" thing to do. I can hold that story of "being right" more lightly in a Byron Katie sort of way. But there is still a sense of how could I NOT "touch" that situation-- it seemed the only thing to do (and indeed my partner ended up apologizing profusely to his mom). But still... since I peeked at Rose's last page yesterday morning, I saw her awesome question along the lines of "what would you see/do if you had already crashed the gate?". So my question to you is, how does "not touching" apply. Once you see, is there a natural stepping back in view that simply doesn't touch all that happened as it happened (my stepping in included)? Or would seeing in that case see the arising of an argument between mother and son and watch her cry and beat herself up and not need to "touch" it? Because all that too is OK just as it is...

OK... now on to Rose!

[vinceschubert]

I kept reminding myself that "this is as good as it gets" and really sensing that in the midst of an intense headache or getting drawn into family drama or what have you, when you drop all stories, there is just an alive presence and that's enough.

This is major. It is taking the hand off the tiller. Beautiful.
...and it leads right into the next one;

I had a clear and strong "opinion"...how could I NOT "touch" that situation..

The awareness is the difference. With the awareness there is no 'you' doing the 'touching'. And you answered it yourself beautifully;

a natural stepping back in view that simply doesn't touch all that happened as it happened (my stepping in included)?

and this too;

Or would seeing in that case see the arising of an argument between mother and son and watch her cry and beat herself up and not need to "touch" it? Because all that too is OK just as it is...

With awareness there is appreciation of the bigger picture, including seeing the compulsion to involve to shape the outcome. That conditioning will change (probably compassion will increase).
There is a great Buddhist story about good intentions and their possible inappropriateness, that talks about the monkey rescuing the fish from drowning in the water.

As you write about what arises from Roses thread, differentiate between what you get for ix and what is intended for Rose, by bolding or italicizing hers. (or just stating it)

[ixturtle]

With awareness there is appreciation of the bigger picture, including seeing the compulsion to involve to shape the outcome. That conditioning will change (probably compassion will increase).

OK but-- with increased compassion, wouldn't there come an even greater urge to act? I would imagine whatever action emerged would be infused with more intuitive wisdom rather than reactive conditioning. But still, how is this different from "touching"?

Down to the last few pages of Rose's string. Broke my "bed in" to eat lunch but I'm back and determined... well, as much as a false sense of "I" can be determined anyway...

[ixturtle]

YES! First, thank you Rose (or the unique presence of lifeing that calls herself Rose) for providing me with quite a journey. I have pages of quotes I copied from your string (some of which I already posted here). I will post the rest with my thoughts along the way soon-- hopefully tomorrow, but it seems I might be moving to my inlaws to support them through a tough time so as vince said, life will dictate the timing...

For THIS NOW i need to LIBERATE MYSELF FROM THIS BED!!! hahahaha... OK., liberating from bed will happen.

speaking of which, that's another gift I somehow received while reading your posts. i think vince said it in my string a while back but it got reinforced in yours: everything that needs to happen happens, hands off the tiller and watching. truly a miracle to see life in this way (when i do).

much love to you (who i imagine MUST be somewhat nearby since we both seem to have gone through the same storm a few weeks ago-- maybe "we" (our respective bodies & conditioning) can meet for tea some time-- though i realize that LU is not a social networking site! hahaha...

and our course, much love to our mutual guide! wow vince, sometimes i wonder what you do way over there in the land down under to have so much time to support us gate crashing wannabes... oh right, "you" aren't "doing" anything. there is just "life-ing" happening, and actually, from here, there is just my experiencing of your life-ing happening. serious rabbit hole this is.

LOVE LOVE LOVE.

now liberating myself from bed. (that's a start anyway!)

[ixturtle]

About to head out again but wanted to at least post something this eve...

First, this from Rose's string:

Yes, exactly, and hasn't it (essentially) done what is needed ? Real-izing this, you can let go of the tiller. The boat is perfectly capable of steering itself.

Sometimes this is more apparent than others. Right now (in a bit of a quandary about something) I feel like my hand is on the tiller and I'm wondering which way the water is going to move it and meanwhile trying to think through which way the "water" SHOULD move it, which is all very convoluted. Of course, I didn't expect to sit down at the computer, so that is one direction the water moves...

You are experiencing a particular piece of reality, it moves on, then you say you had an experience, but what you have now is only memory of the experiencing. Life is only the memory of past occurrences, of past experiencing. Life-ing, on the other hand is experiencing as it happens.

This really struck me for some reason-- not a new concept, but really seeing my whole life as just a set of memories showing up right now and summed up by the words "my life"-- that's a trip. There's still a sense of efforting to seeing it that way, not so much a natural knowing (in the way one would know an apple if you held it), but there are glimpses anyway.

The whole 'no self' thing is to get you to recognise that thoughts will lead you astray on the matter of reality. They are the total cause of suffering.

"Thoughts will lead you astray on the matter of reality...They are the total cause of suffering." Breathing this in, breathing this out. Especially watching a loved one spin out of control on the basis of their thinking-- i want to yell, "STOP"!!! but really, the mirror always points back right here, right now-- I was going to say the mirror always points back "to me" but the "me" is the thought itself.

It's also confusing because what we write here is necessarily a digital form of our thinking... with the intention of pointing us toward the unthought. While in some sense every thought is a misstep, I have found that thinking in this forum does seem to evoke more glimpses of the unthought, or more simply put, of experiencing just what is without the labels.

Which brings me to one other "thought" for now-- when reading through Rose's string I did the writing exercise of using "I" and then not using it. Like Rose I didn't really have a visceral sense of ease with the latter but what I did notice was that the thinking in the latter was MUCH simpler. Instead of writing "I'm seeing branches move in the wind, my fingers are typing, I'm hearing the tip tap of the computer, I'm feeling my butt on the bed, I'm thinking about what's next" it became more like "breathing, seeing, feeling fingers, breathing, hearing sounds, feeling, breathing, thinking". It wasn't intentional-- just what I noticed after the fact. That without the "I" the thoughts and language generally got more simple-- less need for labels. Oh and also that the breath became much more central to the moment to moment experience. Without the I, there was more stillness (probably because there was less labeling going on) and thus more noticing the simplicity of what's here, which is often just this breath.

These are mostly just bits of Rose's string that resonated and I have a lot more to go through. Towards the end of my notes are more bits from the last 5 pages of Roses string so I'll look at that tomorrow and see what arises as far as "thoughts" for her go. (I will put the Rose bits in pink. ;-)

Peace,
ix

[ixturtle]

Rose said: Time is a concept and not a reality. "I" is a thought and not a reality. There is no "me". I clearly SEE that. Also seen is that there is no Time, no "things", no labels on things, just stuff (It's hard to explain it or describe it). SEEing is happening. Life-ing is happening. There's Just This and This is IT.

This popped out at me because Rose says quite clearly that she actually SEES no "me". (I'm quite sure I'VE never said that!!!!) Isn't that basically the gist of this whole thing? Either you know (see, know, truly deeply get... ay... language!) there's a "me" or you don't. So I'm wondering, do you really SEE (as in without question) that there is "no me"? Or do you "think" there's "no me"? Have you glimpsed it or smelled it but not quite got your hands around it? What is it about "me" that persists if you clearly SEE that there is no "me"? Really, I want to know your answer to this! Otherwise, I say "get thee to post-gate sister!!!" :-)

Similarly, Vince asked at one point:

Do those thoughts belong TO anyone? If so where is he?
Do those emotions arise TO anything ? If so what?
Do those feelings arise TO anyone? If so who?

in all that is Experienced? is there EVER an experience-er?

You didn't really answer these questions directly (Rose said in response, "Again, that "me", which I need to focus on to find and SEE the truth of no "me".) Rather than giving the thinking answers to these (at this point we both can "think" the correct answer) I'm wondering what your direct experience is of this right now?

Note: The other answer you give quite a bit (which i almost went back to count!) is "Thanks, I will look at X." I realize it's a function of language convention and I know I'm guilty many times over of the same thing, BUT the answer still suggests a) an actualizing entity that has volition and control over what it looks at and b) that that entity is going to go do something in the future (implying time, which you note clearly above is not reality). Lots of good pointings in your string seemed to get lost by answering them that way. As one of my guides noted (when he decided to give up being my guide!) it doesn't require a long investigation-- it just takes a few seconds-- there is only now, and either it's true now or it isn't!

I'll add more later, but post on your page whatever resonates from this.

Rose said to Rebecca. "What would you do if you knew the gate was and is being crashed RIGHT NOW, and you knew you couldn't fail at it? What would you do if you knew you couldn't fail at SEEing? What if you knew you were and are succeeding at crashing the gate RIGHT NOW? "

Just relax I guess. Whatever arises, arises. Even doubt is seen as just doubt. As you say, all story... So nothing to do, nothing to take care, no one to be, nothing to change just open to whatever is here (and then whatever is next).

Similarly, in your string somewhere Vince said,

Say to yourself (with conviction) "i will totally accept WHATEVER is happening as IT!
Even when I forget that this is what i am doing, i will accept the forgetting as an expression of IT !
When i catch myself having an opinion about anything, but especially about my 'self', i will accept that this is an expression of IT !
i will behave 'as if' this conviction is Real, and even when doubts occur, i will accept them as an expression of IT !"

For about 20 hours this weekend (8 of which i was sleeping so that doesn't really count) this conviction was numero uno present in my awareness and it really did shift my relationship with just about everything, even the moments i was really caught up. Then the habits of mind kicked in and the conviction, while still present, is quite a bit weaker. Question (perhaps for Vince): "this is IT" feels more accessible in a felt sense way than "there is no me". Even when there's a sense that this IS it, there's still a sense of a loose I that is aware of it-- which probably makes no sense to you. It seems that the two must point to the same thing, but now there's just confusion arising around it all...

okay-- that's it for now!

[vinceschubert]

"this is IT" feels more accessible in a felt sense way than "there is no me". Even when there's a sense that this IS it, there's still a sense of a loose I that is aware of it--

Ok, i'll just vomit some words and we'll see what emerges.
The accessibility sense, the sense that this is it, the sense of loose I, the awareness of it, are all IT.
They are also each potentially lying.
They are are all thought generated.
They are all devoid of intrinsic meaning.
They are each something that is reacted to.
That reaction may be simply habit, or the result of belief.
The sense of ...I, being aware is (almost) certainly both habit and belief.
Is this sense of I, anchored to any particular sensation ?
ix, what are your thoughts on the difference (if any) between;
This is it &
This is it &
This is it

Having said that, THIS is it, is what unlocked the gate for me.
Immediately post gate, it was really obvious that the 'self' was only ever conceptual.
There was never a question of who or what was aware of these things.
There was/is just these things.
They are me when the experiencing is them.

[ixturtle]

I'm liking your vomit, Vince, for whatever that's worth...

The accessibility sense, the sense that this is it, the sense of loose I, the awareness of it, are all IT.
They are also each potentially lying.
They are are all thought generated.

Right. Sometimes I think that all my "glimpses" have been thought generated, yet that thought too is IT. and meanwhile life-ing is happening all the time and there it is, perfect awareness revealing itself. So easy to say "I can't SEE" when actually that's what I'm doing all the time-- that's what defines my experience of life just prior to all the story and is as effortless and immediate as anything.

Is this sense of I, anchored to any particular sensation ?

Like Rose, it's mostly a contraction at the heart. I had a friend this past summer who said that for him (I'm going to put this in pink since it's relevant to Rose too) his pre-gate sense of "self" felt located there because probably the initial shock of separation (I'm alone, I'm separate, I'm unworthy) occurred in conjunction with a strong sense of contraction in the heart. For others that shock may have been married more to fear in the gut or what have you. But in any case, it's the earliest strong (and painful) sense of "me" we have. This insight didn't shift things much for me, but it did resonate.

One thing I do a lot is purposefully ask myself-- "who's feeling X (or thinking Y or seeing Z)" and always immediately there a strong "I AM" that pops up in my head. So then I can see the thought (which prior to that was assumed and unconscious) and, seeing that it's just a thought, I can look for something else more tangible that would present itself as feeler/thinker/seer, etc. Sometimes the next thought is "well, OK not this "I" but this body" but that too is a seen as a thought. After a while, there's nothing left but what's here.

Unfortunately so far rather than being left with clarity when there's no more labels, there's instead a sense of confusion. That's generally how I feel standing at the gate. When Rose talks about fear of jumping, I don't really relate-- visceral fear doesn't seem to come up (or if its there, it is buried under the confusion). When I think about jumping, I've no idea where to jump, how to jump, like being utterly confused in a math lecture (sure that I was the only one not getting it, confirming my worst fears-- I'm really stupid and nobody knows it yet). With math I would go home, study like crazy until I got it, but that doesn't seem to work here. So I just keep showing up, waiting I guess, like in the haiku from a while back in Rose's string.

That's all for now-- body needs to get out this door...

Peace to you both...

[vinceschubert]

ix, would you do with Linda, what you have done/doing with Rose. (her thread is "I can't quite get "there"" username cummins55). thanks.

When I think about jumping, I've no idea where to jump, how to jump,

Maybe you have already jumped and it is just a looong way to touchdown.
It seems this way to me for all three of you. Ha, floating somewhere between Jumped and Landed.
In this analogy, when asked "how do you know that you have landed", the answer would be that familiar sensations have returned. (walking, standing, weight, balance etc) So the analogy is a poor one in that this time when you land there won't be the familiar, or rather the familiar will be 'different'. Not that there will be much new, except the familiar will have a new 'tinge' to it. (maybe very subtle)