realizing selflessness

[Anastacia42]

Good. As obsessive as you have been about chasing thoughts (see sig line) I think doing nothing is perfect.

Loving

[whoknows]

As obsessive as you have been about chasing thoughts

“Obsessive”? “Chasing”? I spent a week giving special attention in my meditation time to noticing thoughts arise and not grabbing onto them, which helped them to settle down, and you even seemed to think this was a good thing. I’m confused by the tone here.

[Anastacia42]

I'm sorry. Your posts have been quite a lot about what you're thinking.

The sense of the "self" that I'm trying to see the illusory nature of is, I think, mostly made of thoughts, maybe images especially, plus physical sensations, mainly in my head, especially my face.

True.

Hope that the group provides me clarity.

Self is *completely * made of thoughts & the lie Sensation.

Loving,

[whoknows]

Several times before, I’ve started writing messages like this one but decided not to send them. Now I think it’s time.

You sometimes seem to find me exasperating (and I’m sympathetic to that; you could have a nice long chat with my spouse about it), and it seems like our ways of thinking and communicating don’t mesh very well. So I think it would probably be best, if this is possible, for you to pass me along to another LU guide, maybe just to whoever’s available next or maybe to one who might be especially suited to guide someone who is nerdy, literal-minded, overeducated, and on the autism spectrum. (I feel like I’ve clicked well with Vince in his groups, but he isn’t guiding here anymore, right?)

I like the LU model a lot and do want to stick with it. And I really appreciate all the time you’ve put into guiding me, often responding multiple times a day. But I think it would be better (for me and perhaps for you?) if I were paired with someone else.

[Anastacia42]

You're right. I've noticed this. too. Might be a bit of burnout on my part.

We can see who is available. If you go to his group, ask Vince if he is guiding. Otherwise, you can write a PM to any guide and/or I can post to our Facebook group & see who can take over.

Also, I don't think autism is a factor for me, but check with Pernille. too.i think she has experience with that.

Sorry it didn't work out!

Loving,

[whoknows]

I'm sorry, too, that it didn't work out. Thanks again, Stacy, for all the time you spent with me!

I will reach out to other guides with PMs.

[Anastacia42]

You're more than welcome.

Vince is particularly good with this if he's available.So is Elad.

Let me know when you see.

[whoknows]

Let me know when you see.

I will. :-)

[vinceschubert]

Ok whoknows, give me your response to this;
The main impediment, as it shows up here, is the felt need to make something happen.

More specifically:
the seeker-pattern that keeps trying to reproduce, control, or get back to peace.

It shows up as:
wanting to know how the quiet happened
wanting to be able to do it again at will
turning calm into a result to be achieved
turning “letting go,” “surrender,” and “do nothing” into things a someone must do
looking for the right method, video, understanding, or inner move that will finally make awakening land

So if I isolate it as cleanly as possible:

Main impediment is the belief that awakening is something a “me” can produce, control, or attain in the future.

Underneath that, there’s a second layer feeding it:

The emotional flavour is the habitual orientation toward fixing discomfort and improving experience — the half-glass-empty reflex that interprets life as something that should be made different.

That is why even good pointers get turned into suffering:

“do nothing” becomes “how do I do do-nothing?”
“let go” becomes “I need to let go better”
“surrender” becomes “I must perform surrender”
a glimpse of peace becomes “how do I make that happen again?”

So the core obstacle is not lack of insight. It is not lack of practice. It is not lack of sincerity.

It is the selfing movement that immediately claims experience and tries to use it to get somewhere else.

Wanting peace is disturbing peace.
Wanting awakening is reinforcing the seeker.

The main impediment to “waking up” is the attempt to wake up.

What seems to most obstruct waking up is the deeply conditioned assumption that “I” can make it happen. You keep trying to reproduce peace, control insight, or perform surrender, and in doing so quietly reinforces the very self it longs to be free of. So the impediment is not lack of understanding, but the reflex to use every glimpse, practice, or pointer as a way to get somewhere else. In that sense, the obstacle is the effort itself — the movement of becoming, fixing, and attaining.

What if the one trying to wake up is the one being seen through?
What if the effort to arrive is what creates the sense of distance?
What if nothing is missing except the idea that something is missing?

much love

vince

[whoknows]

Ok whoknows, give me your response to this;
The main impediment, as it shows up here, is the felt need to make something happen.

More specifically:
the seeker-pattern that keeps trying to reproduce, control, or get back to peace.

Yes, this seems like an accurate diagnosis. Especially this:

looking for the right method, video, understanding, or inner move that will finally make awakening land

Yes to all the rest of it too.

The main impediment to “waking up” is the attempt to wake up.

That does seem to be where I am now.

And my mind immediately moves toward, "OK, so what do I DO about this?" And then I hear Adyashanti saying helpfully, with a hint of a smile, "Do nothing" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYQ1jtDSauo).

I get that "Do nothing" might sound too much like doing something is a problem, and I recognize that doing something is not necessarily a problem. The problem is . . . well, maybe, thinking I should do something, or not being able to step back and just observe the doing happening, right? So the pointer might more precisely be "There's nothing you need to do"? and maybe "There's nothing you can do"? (I thought about going back and editing out the "you" in those two sentences but decided to leave it.) But I like the pithiness of "Do nothing" as a reminder/pointer to myself.

Wanting awakening is reinforcing the seeker.

This makes sense, but then the mind goes, "But what do I DO about it?" . . . There's nothing to do? . . . Ugh. OK.

What if the one trying to wake up is the one being seen through?
What if the effort to arrive is what creates the sense of distance?
What if nothing is missing except the idea that something is missing?

And here we go again: Wishing that if I read this over and over, it will finally make awakening land.

Thank you so much, Vince, for being willing to work with me!!! I was about to say something like, "It feels like the 'self' illusion is doomed." But I recognize that that's still putting something in the future on a timeline that isn't even real (in the absolute sense), so . . . Aagh. Will I just keep spinning around in this until I get so dizzy I fall to the ground?

[whoknows]

P.S. I was just rereading your message and reflecting on this:

More specifically:
the seeker-pattern that keeps trying to reproduce, control, or get back to peace.

It shows up as:
wanting to know how the quiet happened
wanting to be able to do it again at will
turning calm into a result to be achieved

I actually feel mainly like I want to produce peace, not "reproduce" it, since I'm not sure I've experienced it much if at all. And I'm not particularly interested in reproducing "quiet" or "calm," given that those are just on the spectrum of ordinary, ever-changing human moods or experiences: being quiet as opposed to chatter-brained, and calm as opposed to agitated. I'm looking for a peace or equanimity that encompasses or underlies or transcends the entire range of moods and experiences, and I haven't had much of a taste of that.

I may be unfairly discounting the sense of what Rupert Spira calls "awareness," which I am able to access, though usually only very briefly: that sense of quiet, aware, peaceful, spaciousness in which all experience happens and from which all experience is made (in his language, which maybe doesn't entirely jibe with "no-self" language, though I suspect the experiences are the same or similar). But so far, that has felt mostly like merely a momentary reprieve from the dis-ease with which I generally experience life.

[vinceschubert]

I actually feel mainly like I want to produce peace, not "reproduce" it, since I'm not sure I've experienced it much if at all. And I'm not particularly interested in reproducing "quiet" or "calm," given that those are just on the spectrum of ordinary, ever-changing human moods or experiences: being quiet as opposed to chatter-brained, and calm as opposed to agitated. I'm looking for a peace or equanimity that encompasses or underlies or transcends the entire range of moods and experiences, and I haven't had much of a taste of that.

I may be unfairly discounting the sense of what Rupert Spira calls "awareness," which I am able to access, though usually only very briefly: that sense of quiet, aware, peaceful, spaciousness in which all experience happens and from which all experience is made (in his language, which maybe doesn't entirely jibe with "no-self" language, though I suspect the experiences are the same or similar). But so far, that has felt mostly like merely a momentary reprieve from the dis-ease with which I generally experience life.

Hi whoknows, this is good. But notice this: “I want to produce peace” is still the same movement as seeking. It says, “peace is not here; it must be generated later.”
That is exactly the seeker structure: not having something now and trying to obtain it in the future. We want to point instead to recognising what is actual, not manufacturing a preferred state.

So don’t try to produce peace.

Look now.

There is “dis-ease.” Fine. Where is it, before the word *dis-ease* appears?

Is Chest? Belly? Throat? Face? Hands? Somewhere else?

Drop the word peace. Drop awareness. Drop equanimity. Drop transcendence.

What is actually here?

Not the explanation. Not Rupert’s language. Not no-self language. Not “quiet spaciousness.” Just the raw data.

Let's be blunt about this: when “awareness” is turned into a thing, attention goes back into the head and the body is ignored. What is actually available is sensory experiencing: sensations, sounds, colours, thoughts appearing.

So test this directly:

Right now, let the sense of unease be fully here.

Do not calm it.

Do not spaciously contain it.

Do not transcend it.

Do not improve it.

Find the exact bodily texture of it.

Is the suffering in the sensation itself, or in the thought that says, “This shouldn’t be here; peace should be here instead”?

That is the knife edge.

Peace is not a mood opposed to agitation. It is not quiet opposed to chatter. But it is also not some hidden substance underneath experience that you need to access and hold onto.

The demand for “a peace that encompasses all moods” may be another refusal of this mood.

Can agitation be here without becoming my failure to be peaceful?

Can dis-ease be here without becoming evidence that I haven’t got it?

Can this exact experience be allowed before the mind measures it against some imagined spiritual baseline?

The instruction is very simple: whatever is currently experienced—pleasant, unpleasant, spiritual, unspiritual—is THIS. Nothing to do but watch, or not. Even apparent failure is included.

So report from the body:

Where is the unease right now?

What shape, pressure, movement, temperature, vibration?

And when the thought comes, “This is only a momentary reprieve,” what is that thought protecting?

much love

vince