Looking for a guide

[poppyseed]

Hi Lanie,
Yes — really nicely put, and this is a great sign:

I can look at the things and colours around me and be in that space before thought arrives.

That space before the label is the key. Don’t rush past it. Stay with that.
Just this… colour, movement, sensation — arising. No gap, no name, no center, no distance.
Now look again:
Can a “thing” be seen at all?
If you drop the thought “tree” — is there anything left but colour and shape? Or does the idea of “tree” create the appearance of a solid object where there’s only texture and hue? If you don’t “focus” on something it exists as a blur. And remember, focusing is just thought isolating a pattern and describing it :) (no observer, no awareness or consciousness)
Now look again at the “tree”… No special skills required like squinting or flattening, just normal everyday stuff.
If you don’t focus on it what’s actually there (e.g. “tree stays in your peripheral vision”)? Isn’t it just a blur of shape and colour?
And even when focus happens isn’t that just thought isolating a pattern and calling it “tree”?
Where does the tree begin or end? Can you find a fixed edge, or is it just colour shading into colour, no hard lines, no objects?
Focus is just attention + naming. And that is just thought.
Let the image soften. Let the label fall away. Just seeing… already here.

And notice this too:
Even without the story, the colours don’t collapse, the world doesn’t break. It’s still perfectly functional. The “bird” still flies, the “sweater” still keeps you warm. The icons still open the app. Nothing wrong with birdwatching - I enjoy it too :)
But now there’s space.
No need to stop labelling — just watch what happens when the label lands. Does it bring a story? A contraction? A sense of “me” in relation to “it”?
You don’t need to drop the label — just see that it’s a label. Just like that little blue “bird icon” isn’t really a bird, right?
And then ask:
Where’s the “me” in all of this? Is there still someone here, standing apart, doing the looking?
Or is it just looking… and the label “me” dropping in as another thought, like “tree,” like “sweater”?

Labels/thoughts are not the villain here. Thought’s nature is extremely simple. A thought appears. It describes something. What it describes has no requirement to be real – it’s self-organised meaning. Thought isn’t trying to deceive — it just produces symbols. Illusion happens only when there is secondary meaning assigned for these symbols. The analogy of a movie spool comes to mind. The sequencing of thoughts creates the illusion of a separate I/Lanie or objects/others very similarly to the frames of a movie, where rapid series of still images create the illusion of movement. When frame rate slows down all the illusion of movement is lost. The illusion is a by-product of secondary thoughts about simple descriptions.
It happens when a second thought appears and describes the first thought as if it were reality. Not the first thought itself — the interpretation of it.
For example:
Primary thought: “a sound.” - just a description, followed by
Primary label: thought naming the sound (“bird,” “car”).
Secondary thought: “I am disturbed by that sound.” - this creates “me,” “sound,” “disturbance,” “cause and effect.” The illusion is not the sound, not the sensation, nor the first label. Illusion is the by-product of thought commenting on thought. The moment thought starts describing its own descriptions (not DE), it manufactures a doer, a thinker, a feeler, a witness, a center, a timeline, a cause, a meaning… none of which exist in DE.
Illusion comes only when thought begins treating its own content as facts – it becomes self-organised around its own content and not DE. Thus…
Without the secondary thoughts, where is the illusion?
And most importantly…
Is there an observer of the illusion, or is that, too, just part of the illusion?

Keep watching. Let it all unwind — self and other — all part of the same lava lamp.
Love
Rali

[LanieRO]

Hi again Rali,

These questions feel a bit like taking mushrooms. :)

Can a “thing” be seen at all?

Definitely not. A "thing" is always an interpretation, a label on colours.

is there anything left but colour and shape? Or does the idea of “tree” create the appearance of a solid object where there’s only texture and hue?

Exactly, although I don’t think there’s shape and texture either, just more colour.

Isn’t it just a blur of shape and colour?
And even when focus happens isn’t that just thought isolating a pattern and calling it “tree”?
Where does the tree begin or end? Can you find a fixed edge, or is it just colour shading into colour, no hard lines, no objects?

When not focused on, yes, the tree is just a blur. When there is focus, I think that’s thought + muscle tension or movement - eye muscles move differently when focusing on something close versus far.

Focusing on a tree requires a concept of a tree and the edges are a bit arbitrary and are assumed. I imagine a tree, I know there’s a trunk, so when I’m looking at a specific tree I delineate, almost randomly, what belongs to tree A and what doesn’t. This is an assumption not DE.

Seeing happens before labels like beginning or end or edge or object or thing.

No need to stop labelling — just watch what happens when the label lands. Does it bring a story? A contraction? A sense of “me” in relation to “it”?
You don’t need to drop the label — just see that it’s a label. Just like that little blue “bird icon” isn’t really a bird, right?

Labels often bring a story. Most of the stories are a bit negative - it’s too cold out, it’s too wet out - this implies a me that is inconvenienced by reality. Sometimes there’s a more positive one - I just saw a stained glass window reflected in a puddle that was really captivating. I could feel an “I” trying to download and save the image to the hard drive of my brain. This was again a contracting of trying to “keep” something, and a distraction and a separation from being part of the flow of experience.

Where’s the “me” in all of this? Is there still someone here, standing apart, doing the looking?
Or is it just looking… and the label “me” dropping in as another thought, like “tree,” like “sweater”?

I think just looking. Perception happens automatically and doesn’t need a self.

Without the secondary thoughts, where is the illusion?
And most importantly…
Is there an observer of the illusion, or is that, too, just part of the illusion?

Without thoughts, there is no illusion. And the observer is also part of the illusion.

[poppyseed]

Hi Lanie,
This is lovely - so clear, grounded, and honest. Really well done.

Perception happens automatically and doesn’t need a self.

Yes. Now let’s stay with that a moment.
If perception happens automatically…If colour appears automatically…If sound, sensation, movement — all just happen, without needing anyone… Then what is this “I” that wants to capture the stained-glass puddle?
Can that “I” be found in the experience?
Is it separate from the looking? Or is it just another label — like “tree,” like “cold,” like “window”?
You said the label “bird” turns the blur into a thing…
What does the label “me” do?
Does it also turn the flowing, ever-changing lava lamp into a fixed object/a central character with preferences, problems, goals?
And if that label drops… What’s left?

When there is focus, I think that’s thought + muscle tension or movement - eye muscles move differently when focusing on something close versus far.

That’s a good observation. But now, look closer:
In direct experience, do you see muscles moving?
Do you see eye tension?
Or is all of that after-the-fact explanation — another layer of interpretation?
And when something becomes “focused,” does that shift happen in vision itself OR is it thought zooming in, isolating part of the colour field and naming it?
Try relaxing the focus, letting the seen just be what it is, without effort.
Isn’t there still seeing, even without narrowing in?
Focus may happen — it’s not a problem. But can you notice how it happens?
Is it something you do, or just another story about seeing?

Without thoughts, there is no illusion. And the observer is also part of the illusion.

Yes! But it’s not about stopping thought. It’s about seeing thought for what it is.
Thoughts can keep coming, just like clouds pass through the sky. But when they’re seen as thoughts — not facts, not reality, not evidence of a “me” — then the illusion doesn’t take hold. It unhooks itself. So the key isn’t removing thought… it’s removing belief in it as solid. We recognize it as a description, an interpretation, or an entertaining
story. It becomes easier to step back and notice that there is something else going on besides the thought-story; it becomes possible to notice peace underneath all thoughts. The story does not disappear, but it is seen as empty, not solid, not that serious, and, sometimes, even hilarious. The story can be taken lightly; it can be entertaining and fun, as
well as serious when a situation asks for seriousness. It still appears that there is a “me,” but it is known to be a useful concept, not the truth. Then, the mind can relax and come back to it’s natural state of being open, curious, joyful, playful, and free. It can notice "spaciousness" and "oneness" or "flow" (still concepts) when it is no longer trying to fit and organize experience into a frame of fixed ideas.

Now the next step is: can "you" see that as thoughts arise?
Thought says “I’m observing.” Just check…
Is there an observer or just the thought about one?

Love
Rali

[LanieRO]

Hi Rali,

I think there’s been a shift of sorts. It wasn’t quite what was expected - I didn’t become invisible, or have no needs, or drop all of my neuroses at once, or develop saintly patience out of the blue.

It’s more like… looking at things feels kind of overwhelming. Like looking at the ocean on a really sunny day and I feel like I have to squint all the time. Or suddenly having access to widescreen vision, when I didn’t before. It feels sort of exhausting, to be honest. I’m slightly dizzy, and my vision is sort of soft, if that makes sense.

And a wave of anger washed over me earlier - literally no idea what triggered it, there was no story whatsoever, and it also didn’t bother me at all. It was just there for a minute or so, then faded completely. The same thing just happened a few minutes ago with intense sadness.

I used to think no self was like “I don’t exist!” and that seemed bizarre and magical and strangely aspirational. Now my understanding is that self awareness and consciousness is not “me.” It’s a fancy and tedious brain mechanism. It claims credit for this whole organism through self-referential thought, but the whole thing is actually taking place in the subconscious and the conscious mind has no control. And maybe isn’t even conscious like it thinks it is.

Thoughts are still popping up all the time but they’re quite boring, particularly compared to everything happening around.

There’s still reactivity - I had my whole typical reaction to a driver that didn’t shoulder check - but I didn’t actually feel a reaction. There was no tightness or bodily response, just a physical one. I think I could still get upset and be properly reactive if certain buttons were pushed, but i think it might be a bit of conditioning; I’m not sure.

Then what is this “I” that wants to capture the stained-glass puddle?

A delusion, who doesn’t understand that you can’t save experiences for later.

Does it also turn the flowing, ever-changing lava lamp into a fixed object/a central character with preferences, problems, goals?
And if that label drops… What’s left?

The label “me” turns a flow of sensations into a character in a story. When the label drops, the flow returns.

In direct experience, do you see muscles moving?
Do you see eye tension?
Or is all of that after-the-fact explanation — another layer of interpretation?

I’m not 100% positive here. I feel like something moves a little bit in the eyes, but I can see really clearly that most of what happens is thought about focusing, and that thought adds tension to the eyes and the mind and cuts the object of attention from the background.

And when something becomes “focused,” does that shift happen in vision itself OR is it thought zooming in, isolating part of the colour field and naming it?

There’s thoughts around isolation, naming, and focusing.

Isn’t there still seeing, even without narrowing in?
Focus may happen — it’s not a problem. But can you notice how it happens?
Is it something you do, or just another story about seeing?

There is still seeing without narrowing.

I do think there are two things happening - I have a slight eye shift when I focus. I’m not sure it’s an inherent part of focusing or maybe just something I habitually do. With effort, I can see that shifting my eyes isn’t necessary for focus and focus can absolutely happen without it - my habit is a slight eye shift (especially, or maybe only, my left eye??) I’m starting to really think this is a me-thing, and not at all a natural part of focusing.

Now the next step is: can "you" see that as thoughts arise?
Thought says “I’m observing.” Just check…
Is there an observer or just the thought about one?

There’s just arising and thoughts of observing.

[poppyseed]

Hi Lanie,
There’s clearly a shift happening, even if it’s not dramatic or mystical. What you’re describing — the wideness, the soft visual field, the rawness of emotional waves that move through without story — this is the shift. It’s ordinary, and yet radically intimate.

I used to think no self was like “I don’t exist!” and that seemed bizarre and magical and strangely aspirational. Now my understanding is that self awareness and consciousness is not “me.” It’s a fancy and tedious brain mechanism. It claims credit for this whole organism through self-referential thought, but the whole thing is actually taking place in the subconscious and the conscious mind has no control. And maybe isn’t even conscious like it thinks it is.

That … is still a beautiful story — just with new content. It’s totally natural that a new story arises to explain the absence of the old one. It’s like the mind says: “Okay, there’s no me, but I’ll tell you why there’s no me!”
And that’s fine. Really. But also — check if there’s still a subtle “someone” hiding in that narrator role – to whom is the shift happening? The "brain"? The self-awareness? This is still a fairy tale layered on top of indescribable this/a mystery - it's here, it's undeniable, but whatever explanation you add to it, it will be not it, because it's unknowable. Meaning comes only through a combination of empty concepts conditioned to fit together like puzzle pieces. The closest description to what is really happening is just this like a pointing word which brings the story back to DE, and cuts the fairy tales short.

The whole thing is actually taking place in the subconscious.

How is that known, exactly? Right now — in direct experience — is there a subconscious? Or is that just another clever thought, another little icon on the screen?
It used to be “I am real.” Now it’s “I’m not real, but my subconscious is!”
We trade “I am the thinker” for “the brain is doing everything.”
But notice: isn’t that still another narrator?
Just keep watching what happens when even that story falls away.
Even the claim “there is no control” is still a belief, a view. But in direct experience, is there any sense of control? Or any lack of it either? Or just… this happening, without a center, without a cause? Do you see the difference between a story and DE? In DE there are no conclusions, no insights, no shifts, no change – the shift is only in the story. And the noticing of a shift is still a commentary. I'm not splitting hairs here - I'm pointing to something important here... What goes through the gate?

And that brings me to this part:

I’m not 100% positive here. I feel like something moves a little bit in the eyes, but I can see really clearly that most of what happens is thought about focusing, and that thought adds tension to the eyes and the mind and cuts the object of attention from the background.

Let’s zoom in here gently. Feel like?
In DE, do you see “eye muscles” moving?
Do you feel “tension”?
Or are those just thoughts about seeing_feeling, layered on top of what’s already happening?
When something becomes “focused,” does that actually happen in vision itself, or is it simply thought narrowing in, isolating a pattern in the colour field and calling it “thing”?
There may be a subtle sensation — but is that a cause of seeing, or just part of the same seamless arising?
Seeing and feeling aren’t two things. The difference about being in focus and being blurred is a thought. Details vs smudges is all about contrasting colours and the conditioned narration that goes along. There is no muscle causing vision, no thought initiating attention. All of it — colour, sensation, thought— arises together, like inseparable ripples in the same ocean. The split between them comes later, in labels. It’s all inseparable seen_heard_felt_smelled_tasted_thought – just this
There’s no need to reject stories or labels. They're not the problem. Just notice how, once the label lands, a character is born (with eyes that they move), a center appears, a narrative begins.
But before that?
Just this.
As you beautifully said:

The label ‘me’ turns a flow of sensations into a character in a story. When the label drops, the flow returns.

Exactly. Keep watching gently when the mind/the story wants to turn that flow into a mechanism, a theory, a narrator. Nothing needs to be done. Just return to the simplicity of what's already here.
Love
Rali

[LanieRO]

Hi Rali,

After the other day, the shift has largely faded and I feel basically normal again today. That felt like the strongest shift yet - it was the most different and lasted most of the day, and I can still feel faint flickers of it, but it’s largely dissipated.

It’s like the mind says: “Okay, there’s no me, but I’ll tell you why there’s no me!”
And that’s fine. Really. But also — check if there’s still a subtle “someone” hiding in that narrator role – to whom is the shift happening? The "brain"? The self-awareness?

Yeah - I think there’s definitely someone hiding there. During the shift yesterday, there was a strong sense of a “me” trying (uselessly) to manage things. It was disappointed that some things weren’t gone (cravings, judgements). It was trying to take advantage of the altered state to improve the self - make me more compassionate, more healed, more motivated. It was doing its best to make the shift permanent by trying to calm the nervous system so it could accept this way of being.

How is that (that everything is taking place in the subconscious) known, exactly? Right now — in direct experience — is there a subconscious? Or is that just another clever thought, another little icon on the screen?

The subconscious in DE is just a thought. The narrative sense of self needs a story to assure itself that its not crazy (this seems a reasonable request… part of me felt a little insane yesterday and needed assurances from a story).

“I’m not real, but my subconscious is!”
We trade “I am the thinker” for “the brain is doing everything.”
But notice: isn’t that still another narrator?

Yes.

Even the claim “there is no control” is still a belief, a view. But in direct experience, is there any sense of control? Or any lack of it either? Or just… this happening, without a center, without a cause? Do you see the difference between a story and DE?

In DE, there is just happening. When you say ‘without a centre’, that has confused me a lot in the past, but I think it’s getting clearer. It’s like how any sense phenomena appears somewhere, in this (non) place that doesn’t feel localized. The mind can localize it, if it wants, by mapping it onto the body, but really it seems to just kind of show up somewhere. Right?

I'm pointing to something important here... What goes through the gate?

The gate might be more like the losing of something than the attaining of something. Maybe whatever is left after nothing is left goes through the gate. That might be a mind-answer; there’s nowhere in DE to find that.

In DE, do you see “eye muscles” moving?
Do you feel “tension”?
Or are those just thoughts about seeing feeling, layered on top of what’s already happening?
When something becomes “focused,” does that actually happen in vision itself, or is it simply thought narrowing in, isolating a pattern in the colour field and calling it “thing”?

I’m realizing it might not be the eyes themselves, but the muscles around them, or a tendency to squint when focusing. But that’s extra; that’s a muscle pattern on top of isolating a pattern.

There may be a subtle sensation — but is that a cause of seeing, or just part of the same seamless arising?

Seamless arising.

once the label lands, a character is born (with eyes that they move), a center appears, a narrative begins.
But before that?

Just the flow of sensory phenomena. No subject or object before something is made into a thing. It’s all just experience.

[poppyseed]

Hi Lanie,
This post carries so much clarity, even in the “faded” state. Sometimes what’s left after a shift ebbs is more illuminating than the peak itself — because now it’s not just a glimpse; it’s available for questioning. The shift is an altered state, but it passes. Then you are back to your baseline experience, minus the "me". Coming back to your former baseline state, minus the illusion that just fell away, will happen in every step of the integration – seeing “existence” in a new light. I am sorry to disappoint, but you will never end up in a permanently altered state, a permanent high. It is always, “And now chop wood and carry water”.

Yeah - I think there’s definitely someone hiding there. During the shift yesterday, there was a strong sense of a “me” trying (uselessly) to manage things. It was disappointed that some things weren’t gone (cravings, judgements). It was trying to take advantage of the altered state to improve the self - make me more compassionate, more healed, more motivated. It was doing its best to make the shift permanent by trying to calm the nervous system so it could accept this way of being

That’s such a clear example of secondary thought (thought about thought), where identification forms. But is there “someone” being identified with thoughts? A subtle manager, quietly narrating: “Okay, great shift! Now let’s lock it in. Let’s optimize this. Let’s be kinder. Let’s heal, grow, keep the benefits.” But check again:
Who’s saying that?
Is there actually a "someone" managing? “Someone” hidden? How well hidden they must be for their presence not to be able to be spotted and described at all so far?! What is that mysterious entity playing hide and seek? No, really…
What is it? What is it that is currently identified with thoughts?
What is it that is standing apart from thought and has the ability to disregard them or believe them? Is there someone outside of thoughts, being identified with them?
Where is the mysterious, unknown, outside entity?
OR is there just a new thought, one that narrates, critiques, encourages — and calls itself me?
Is that thought hidden or is it right there?
This “me” isn’t hiding behind something… it is the hiding. It’s not that something is obscuring DE — it’s that a commentary rises on top of it, claiming to be a central one who’s doing the observing, shifting, healing, or maintaining.
But what happens if that secondary thought is seen for what it is — just another story?
Another desktop icon? Does anything fall apart?
Or is it just this — sensation, colour, sound, even thoughts — already happening, without a center?
No need to stop the story. Just watch it as it spins.
It doesn’t reveal a (hidden) self. It creates one. Do you see the difference?

This might be a stage where you might feel stuck, as if nothing is moving again. It is clear that what we call ‘self’ or ‘Lanie’ cannot be found, although it still feels like there is one. A cognitive dissonance may arise where the feelings and the findings contradict each other. This can last for quite a while – it is a holding pattern. Resist the temptation to resolve the cognitive dissonance by concluding that since a ‘me’ can’t be found, then there is no ‘me’. YOU will not be able to resolve it. The answer whether there is a ‘me’ will be revealed to “you”, when looking. Though not everybody experiences this rather frustrating stage, most do. The frustration is quite normal. As you continue to explore, there will be a moment when all of a sudden it is as clear as day that there is no ‘me’. The patterns might still show up - the cravings, the judgements - but they are seen for what they are, as illusions/mislabelling. It didn't take a "me" to form them, so the "death" of "me" doesn't dissolve them. The illusions just have to be seen on their own, one by one. The appearance of cravings and judgements doesn't deduct a hidden self, just an unchecked illusion - something that has to be seen in a new light. You might ask yourself why you ever believed in a self, since it is so obvious that it never existed. Nothing changed, but everything looks different :)

The subconscious in DE is just a thought.

Exactly. The “I” trades costumes — first it’s “me,” then it becomes “brain,” then “subconscious,” then “awareness” or even more grandiose – “the Universe” or “God”/”Brahman”. But the casting call is the same every time: someone must be in charge of this. Just keep gently checking: is that story, or direct experience?

It’s like how any sense phenomena appears somewhere, in this (non) place that doesn’t feel localized. The mind can localize it, if it wants, by mapping it onto the body, but really it seems to just kind of show up somewhere. Right?

Yes — beautifully said. What appears doesn’t land in anything. It’s not “in” the body, “in” the mind, or “in” consciousness. That’s just more metaphor. In DE, it just… is. Appearing. Without distance. Without container. And once again, thought comes in afterward and says, “I think the brain mapped that!”

Maybe whatever is left after nothing is left goes through the gate.

That’s not a mind-answer, that’s a perfect pointer. What goes through is not a someone. It’s more like: everything that could go through dissolves. And yet… here everything still is. Clear, ordinary, and wordless.

I’m realizing it might not be the eyes themselves, but the muscles around them… but that’s extra.

Beautiful catch. Exactly — even that is “extra.” Tension isn’t causing seeing; seeing isn’t causing tension. They’re not two things. In DE, they just arise together, like different ripples in the same pond. Seeing + feeling + naming — all one seamless field. The split into “cause and effect” or “inner and outer” is just more thought/naming building another desktop.

Just the flow of sensory phenomena. No subject or object before something is made into a thing. It’s all just experience.

That’s it. The story of “focus,” of “me,” of “eyes” — none of that appears until the label lands. Before that? Only flow. Colour. Blur. Nothing owns it. No edge defines it. Nothing needs to grasp it.
So even if the shift “faded,” the seeing hasn’t. It can’t. The seeing of seeing — the seeing of the me trying to keep it, improve it, explain it — that’s the seeing that remains.
Just keep meeting what’s here.
Love
Rali

[LanieRO]

Hi Rali,

Thanks for the message; that really resonated with what I’m experiencing.

When I experience a glimpse or a shift, it feels a lot like being on a low dose of mushrooms. Colours sharpen, thoughts drop off, and experience is in flow. It feels like being an avatar in a game, like I’m not really this character but I’m getting a fun chance to experience pretending to be them. My story, problems, history, and insecurities aren’t personal; they belong to the avatar, and suddenly they aren’t a bother anymore.

Problems with aversion/craving have been coming up and feel monumental all of a sudden. Like I can see more clearly how much suffering is coming from these and I feel pulled into a new investigation and shadow work in this regard. I think the identification with aversion/craving is where a sense of self is hiding out and this feels like a sticking point.

But is there “someone” being identified with thoughts? A subtle manager, quietly narrating: “Okay, great shift! Now let’s lock it in. Let’s optimize this. Let’s be kinder. Let’s heal, grow, keep the benefits.” But check again:
Who’s saying that?

Hmm. Yeah, it is just thoughts. No one is saying that. It’s just conditioning behind that.

There’s a sense of resistance and anxiety and non-acceptance that accompanies these thoughts, so I thought they would also drop off as clarity became stronger.

Is there actually a "someone" managing? “Someone” hidden? How well hidden they must be for their presence not to be able to be spotted and described at all so far?! What is that mysterious entity playing hide and seek? No, really…
What is it? What is it that is currently identified with thoughts?
What is it that is standing apart from thought and has the ability to disregard them or believe them? Is there someone outside of thoughts, being identified with them?
Where is the mysterious, unknown, outside entity?
OR is there just a new thought, one that narrates, critiques, encourages — and calls itself me?
Is that thought hidden or is it right there?

The sense of managing is just thoughts. As for what’s identified with thoughts, there’s a really strong sense of grasping and clinging going along with this. A wild search for something to fix me - I think this is where the sense of clinging / aversion is connected that I was mentioning before.

But what happens if that secondary thought is seen for what it is — just another story?
Another desktop icon? Does anything fall apart?
Or is it just this — sensation, colour, sound, even thoughts — already happening, without a center?
No need to stop the story. Just watch it as it spins.
It doesn’t reveal a (hidden) self. It creates one. Do you see the difference?

It is just a story, a story that there is an “I” in need of some sort of “salvation.” I’m feeling some loosening around this. There’s a lot of story here for me, and a lot of very fundamental beliefs about myself - but you’re absolutely right; these beliefs come together to create a sense of “I.” Without that story,they fall apart.

(Brief story backgrounder: fundamentalist protestant upbringing and really strong belief in myself being unfathomably bad. Left religion, but the belief persists. I think basically I’m hoping meditation can do for me what I had once hoped Jesus would).

My badness is just a story. My need for salvation / fixing is just a story. There is a lot of identification in my flaws, but really, that’s thought and belief and story and conditioning.

“the Universe” or “God”/”Brahman”. But the casting call is the same every time: someone must be in charge of this. Just keep gently checking: is that story, or direct experience?

Story. The mind is conditioned to look for certainty and explanation and is uncomfortable when there is none. I see these castings as stepping stones that are eventually dissolved.

[poppyseed]

Hi Lanie,
This is such a rich place to be in, where the story of “me needing salvation” starts to be seen as the story. And you’re seeing it beautifully.
One thing you said jumped out:

There’s a really strong sense of grasping and clinging going along with this.

Can we look really directly?
In sensation, not in story, is there truly something grasping or clinging?
Is there an actual thing holding on to another thing?
Sometimes there's tightness, sure. A pulling in the chest, a buzz in the belly, a contraction behind the eyes. But does any of that say “I am clinging”? Or is “clinging” just the label that thought puts on top of raw sensation?
Even the word “tension”, is that what’s there, or is that already the story about what’s there?
If the label drops… what remains?
Just this… shifting play of feeling, colour, sound, thought. No controller. No suffer-er. No grasper. Just this. Already happening.

And about this idea:

There’s a sense of resistance and anxiety and non-acceptance that accompanies these thoughts, so I thought they would also drop off as clarity became stronger.

This is a really subtle expectation that often sneaks in... That seeing “no self” should automatically clear out cravings, aversions, or old conditioning.
But the seeing doesn't erase feeling. In fact, it can amplify it at first, because the buffer (the story of “me”) is thinner. There’s no trick or shortcut here:
Whatever’s left needs to be felt — slowly, openly, without a goal, not as a practice. Just as it shows, it has be seen_felt_relabeled
This isn’t about getting rid of discomfort. It’s about making friends with it. Sitting in the fire until it stops burning. “Discomfort” is a label, but this has to be seen_felt with each one of them, it’s not automatic. The self didn’t create them – they are as much as an illusion as the self – but that has to be seen with each one of these sensations. Not as a theory but in real time. Not deducted, but felt fully. The illusion is in the individual conditioned label, not only in the lack of creator/sufferer. So yes, with each one, the “strategy” is:
Is there a "me" in the guilt, anger, dissatisfaction, fear, jealousy… ?
What is the actual sensation? Does it announce in any way that it is fear, anger, guilt, shame??? How is it known them that this sensation is related to …?
Once you are at just raw sensation without the thoughts, allow the sensation all the space it needs without pushing it aside or judging it. Sensations come and then go. Keep on looking at what the thought is trying to protect. Is there anything that needs protecting?

Each craving, each aversion, each fear — it’s not a mistake. It’s the next gate.
The practice now is intimacy. Stay with each uncomfortable ripple in the body until it's no longer “uncomfortable," but just another movement in the lava lamp. Just another colour in the swirl. No resistance, no pushing. Just presence.
This is the integration. And it’s already happening. This is not proof that the self still lingers around (or is it??, check!), this is just the cleaning up of old conditioning… Do you see that? There is no sticking point, no velcro for the self to stick, and no self to stick anywhere – just an opportunity for these sensations to be seen in a new light.
So when the next resistance appears in any form or shape, don’t despair that the self has returned, but see it as an opportunity for investigation, unravelling of the old stories. There is no poor me that bad things had happened in the past, there is just a sad story that needs to be revisited, so all sensations can flow freely, with a better, more peaceful story. It takes tome to clear up and recycle all the stories, but that doesn't mean that there is a self there left in any form or shape. The self is just a word, and words are not sticky, they just are (appearing). That's it!
Love
Rali

[LanieRO]

Hi Rali,

I meant to tell you yesterday that I really liked what you said about knowing there’s no-self, but not believing it for a while - that describes exactly like where I’m at. I can’t find it, I’ve checked all the hiding spots, I logically know it’s gone, but everything seems to look and feel the same as it always did and that deep gut sense hasn’t hit yet. That felt really affirming to read that the other day.

Can we look really directly? (at the sense of grasping/clinging to thoughts of be good enough)
In sensation, not in story, is there truly something grasping or clinging?
Is there an actual thing holding on to another thing?

It’s really beliefs and responding muscle tension. The beliefs are “I should not have this problem” and “I should be better than this” and “seeing through self should have resolved this issue.” Then there’s other beliefs on top of that - familiar stories about how things I do often fail. These are all thoughts. The body responds with tension and tightness as the story swirls around.

Nothing is holding onto another thing in DE.

Sometimes there's tightness, sure. A pulling in the chest, a buzz in the belly, a contraction behind the eyes. But does any of that say “I am clinging”? Or is “clinging” just the label that thought puts on top of raw sensation?
Even the word “tension”, is that what’s there, or is that already the story about what’s there?
If the label drops… what remains?

Clinging is a label for something that is thought + sensation. Same with tension - without the label, it’s muscles that are tightened and ready for something. The label “tension” comes with a whole lot of assumptions.

Without the label… i guess there’s nothing. There’s no disappointment of things not living up to expectations in DE. And without the disappointment, the tension drops.

Is there a "me" in the guilt, anger, dissatisfaction, fear, jealousy… ?
What is the actual sensation? Does it announce in any way that it is fear, anger, guilt, shame??? How is it known them that this sensation is related to …?

They are thoughts. Sensations have no way of knowing what emotion they supposedly represent (like eyes have no idea what they are seeing). The recognition is not in DE, and the recognition is always just a guess based on other context (like thoughts).

It used to be that when strong emotions came up, stories would come up too and they’d be tightly connected. Now, when there’s something unwinding in the body, sometimes an image or a memory comes up, sometimes it doesn’t. These images and memories are much less insistent and the DE of tension rippling through the body is centralized.

I’m curious about this - the role of story was a point of frustration and confusion for quite a while. It used to be really, really hard to ignore, and now it’s quite mild. Maybe this is the path? There’s a stage where the processing needs story to hang on to, and over time, those stories become less important? And yes, that’s just a story too…

Is there anything that needs protecting?

I don’t think so.

This is the integration. And it’s already happening. This is not proof that the self still lingers around (or is it??

This is integration. Everything you said about staying with each ripple in the body until it’s no longer uncomfortable has been exactly what’s been happening for me and exactly what I’ve been doing. And it’s not proof of a self - every ripple seems to remove a small piece that was holding onto pain and story that centred around “I.”

this is just the cleaning up of old conditioning… Do you see that?

Yeah. I feel like a snake shedding its skin.

[poppyseed]

Hi Lanie
Wonderful!

I can’t find it, I’ve checked all the hiding spots, I logically know it’s gone, but everything seems to look and feel the same as it always did and that deep gut sense hasn’t hit yet.

Fair enough! Just one thing to gently look at — what exactly is a "gut sense" in direct experience?
If you check, can you actually find a thing called “gut sense”?
Or is it maybe a label added later — to a sense of spaciousness, calm, openness, or some quiet shift in body or mind?
Sometimes what we call a “gut sense” is just a configuration of sensations — like a loosening in the belly, a warmth in the chest, or a drop in mental noise — and then a thought comes in and calls that “clarity,” or “a shift,” or “knowing.” That’s fine! But even that is still happening … in thought. How can a state and a label be an indication of a lack of something else? Cause and effect? A spiritual sign? A fairy tale?
So rather than waiting for that gut confirmation, maybe stay close to what’s here now — not as a final proof, but as this simple, silent noticing that doesn’t need a label. The clarity might not arrive as a thunderclap. It might just be what’s already here — minus the expectation. You sound quite clear to me, which makes me want to return to expectations. It make sense to revisit them again. We expect high drama to confirm that a significant shift has occurred. Some common misconceptions:

That I will experience permanent bliss.
That I will never get sick again.
That I will be able to stop my thoughts.
Money problems will be a thing of the past.
I will be able to manifest prosperity.
I will never hurt others again
I will never develop dementia
If I have kids, I’ll be the perfect parent
I will be physically beautiful
I will never have any more interpersonal conflicts
I will never again get angry
I will never be hurt
I will be loved (approval of others)
I will always know what to do (control)
I will always feel good (control feelings / bliss)

Wanting “more” is the flip side of lacking “something”. Wanting is a sign that something is incomplete, or missing. But have a look at this differently - wanting more is just that—wanting/a thought. What are you expecting to happen that hasn't happened yet that will tell you that you have seen that there is no inherent self?

Revisit these again:
1. What will be different when you realize there’s no separate self?
2. What do you expect to happen as a result of this?
3. What do you want not to happen?
4. What are you hoping for?
5. What is missing?

Once it is seen how the illusion of self forms, what more is there to see. It forms by secondary thought as you have seen clearly. So, what more as proof do you still want to see? What exactly in direct experience - just this - shows that it needs more for it to be perfect? What happen when you let go of all these expectations you wrote as answers to the expectation questions?? Aren’t peace, love, oneness - already perfect this - already there quietly underneath all the stories? LOOK! Don’t assess!

Nothing is holding onto another thing in DE.

Exactly. What a clean seeing. There’s just sensation… and then thought gives it a name: tension, grasping, guilt, shame, gut feeling. But when the label drops, what’s left? Tightness maybe. Or heat. Or movement. But no problem. No clinger. No one clinging. No one getting it. Look: Is that doubt even yours?

Without the disappointment, the tension drops.

This is integration. Not sudden enlightenment. Not disappearance. Just unlearning the habit of bracing against experience.

They are thoughts. Sensations have no way of knowing what emotion they supposedly represent…

Perfectly put. Emotions don’t come with name tags. They're silent movements, and thought rushes in afterward to assign meaning. So what exactly can confirm “no self”? “The need for gut feeling” is another thought on top of already perfect this. When there is no story there is more “space” - the sensations get to just... move. Without needing to be about anything (e.g. proving no self)

Maybe this is the path? There’s a stage where the processing needs story to hang on to, and over time, those stories become less important?

Yes. Sometimes the "nervous system" needs the story first — it’s like scaffolding, helping it organize chaos. But as stability (of looking) grows, the story can be seen for what it is: a helpful crutch… until it’s not.
As you saw this is no proof “that the self still lingers.”
You answered it, beautifully by comparing it to “a snake shedding its skin“ Exactly. There’s no need to wait for some perfect final state where nothing triggers and every pattern has disappeared. There won't be a new snake. That’s just another icon, another carrot. Instead, just keep seeing like this — gently, honestly, directly. Moment by moment.
You’re not doing anything wrong. You’re not behind. You’re shedding old skins. Sometimes gracefully. Sometimes messily.
This is it. A system reorganising for a smoother flow on itself.
Love
Rali

[LanieRO]

Hi Rali,

what exactly is a "gut sense" in direct experience?
If you check, can you actually find a thing called “gut sense”?
Or is it maybe a label added later — to a sense of spaciousness, calm, openness, or some quiet shift in body or mind?

The “gut sense” is more feeling the physicality of my body and then adding a label on top that says I exist. The default assumption that “I AM” is usually there - it can be seen through and it can leave, but it tends to come back after a few minutes or a few hours and has to be seen through again.

How can a state and a label be an indication of a lack of something else? Cause and effect? A spiritual sign? A fairy tale?

Yeah, I don’t think this feeling of “I am” is accurate, it’s more a habituated assumption. It doesn’t really mean anything either. It’s just a facade.

What are you expecting to happen that hasn't happened yet that will tell you that you have seen that there is no inherent self?

I think I expected to stop the compulsive pushing and pulling on reality. I can see that sometimes it lets up and that reflex relaxes, but it’s still really strong. Thoughts, even though I know they are just thoughts, still take over and cause a lot of suffering.

I suspect that push/pull feeling will relax over time some more. It does seem to be moving in that direction, but I think I expected a sudden faster movement to release that impulse.

1. What will be different when you realize there’s no separate self?
2. What do you expect to happen as a result of this?
3. What do you want not to happen?
4. What are you hoping for?
5. What is missing?

I will be able to drop resistance to reality. In those glimpses when it’s clear for a few hours that there is no self, resistance is easily dropped, stories are dropped, and things just happen, as they are.

Dropping resistance to reality is peaceful. People can be as they are and I don’t need them to be kind, or healthy, available. They can carry on and it’s absolutely fine. And I can carry on. I don’t need to be happy, or content, or energetic. Whatever is here is here.

Losing connection with others. I know that’s not a real fear, but I feel like if resistance is truly dropped, I will experience life in a way that isn’t relatable to others and make it hard for me to connect.

I’m hoping to lose resistance and aversion to myself and others. I’m hoping for a resting spot. I’ve been in a long period of shadow work over the last few years and it’s been intense and exhausting. I’m in a way better place than I was at the beginning of this, but there’s still a strong desire to find rest. Everytime I do, it seems something else bubbles up.

I don’t think anything is missing. It’s been a stripping away of things. And there is - despite the complaints - a kind of rest in the shadow work. It unwinds itself and I just need to let it.

So, what more as proof do you still want to see? What exactly in direct experience - just this - shows that it needs more for it to be perfect? What happen when you let go of all these expectations you wrote as answers to the expectation questions?? Aren’t peace, love, oneness - already perfect this - already there quietly underneath all the stories? LOOK! Don’t assess!

Yes, that’s true. Everything is already here. There is just this. Reflecting on the questions 1-5 above, everything listed was OUTSIDE this moment - grasping for permanence and assurances and stability. But those things are here now.

There’s just sensation… and then thought gives it a name: tension, grasping, guilt, shame, gut feeling. But when the label drops, what’s left? Tightness maybe. Or heat. Or movement. But no problem. No clinger. No one clinging. No one getting it. Look: Is that doubt even yours?

I love this, and have definitely experienced it and have been experiencing it more and more often, including the experience of a pain being so impersonal it could belong to someone or something else.

Is it impractical to anticipate living in this kind of state full-time?

This has been increasing, even with physical discomfort. It’s really cold out and the coldness has stopped being so automatically mapped onto my body and not automatically uncomfortable and not automatically negative. It’s become a bunch of sensations and a lot of the subconscious stories are loosening and that belief in the self being a victim of the temperature is held much more loosely.

So what exactly can confirm “no self”?

The… non-self? This feels like another zen koan.

I think there is a point where the mind and the ego give up the fight for control and dominance and simply let go and relax and accept.

One of your questions before was something like, “can you say, with certainty, that there is not and has never been any kind of separate self” and I feel like I can say that with hesitation after doing another thorough check. I have moments of certainty but I don’t live in certainty.

[poppyseed]

Hi Lanie,
There’s so much clarity blooming here, even in the moments that still feel uncertain.

The gut sense is more feeling the physicality of my body and then adding a label on top that says I exist.

That’s a beautiful observation. That feeling of “I AM” can seem so fundamental, so true, that it slips under the radar, even as the label “self” is seen through. But just like you said: it’s not the presence of a thing. It’s a habitual echo, a kind of phantom hum of identity that gets mistaken for existence itself.
Check again:
When the label “I am” drops… what’s actually left?
Is that I-am-ness any kind of object or subject? Is it even a human? Is it personal? Or just a sensation?
Is life happening to a being or as being?
Is it what you've taken as "you"?
See that am-ness is just a subtle sensation with a label of “I”/’me”/”Lanie”. Drop the label and all that is left is a subtle sensation.
Is anything lost? SEE that, don't just answer!
Or is there still sensation, seeing, aliveness — just without the story? What does thinking about it add? It is just a (unnecessary/empty) commentary and the commentary does not change this. "Discomfort" is still here, "cold" is still here, but without the story they are not personal and not cold and discomfort at all - just this.

I expected to stop the compulsive pushing and pulling on reality…

Beautiful honesty. And you’re already seeing the heart of it: that expectation itself is the push and pull. It says: this moment isn’t it yet. It’s the thought’s last grasp, not at identity anymore, but at a result, a “final shift,” a finish line.
But there’s no endpoint to being here. It’s a never ending unwinding. No enlightenment certificate.
No ribbon to cut at the finish. Just this. Already here.
Look again — without any expectation:
Right now… what is missing?

Is it impractical to anticipate living in this kind of state full-time?

There’s no need to live in a state full-time. How is it possible to "maintain" something when you are present? Present moment is just one present moment, and has anything to do with a duration of a certain state. That’s another subtle identity — the “one who should remain open forever.” But seeing isn’t a state — it’s not fragile. You don’t fall out of seeing, there is just a story about stories again (secondary thoughts).
When that story relaxes, the quiet is still here. Always was. Always will. It just IS.
And what a beautiful noticing:

The coldness has stopped being so automatically mapped onto my body…

Yes. The shift isn’t in stopping cold or discomfort. It’s that it stops being personal - “my discomfort.”
No victim. No commentary. Just aliveness, without narration. Things are happening but to no one - no awareness, no witness - they just ARE present.

Look: Is that doubt even yours?

I love this, and have definitely experienced it and have been experiencing it more and more often, including the experience of a pain being so impersonal it could belong to someone or something else.

Exactly! So is that doubt your responsibility to solve then if it’s not yours? LOOK! Are you coming up with these thoughts, are you their thinker? Or they just appear? And these expectations? Did you come up with them too? So how can you solve them if you can’t think about their solution? Thoughts will do what thoughts do – create fairy tales.
Who has the doubt??
Does the presence of these thoughts reveal an entity? LOOK please! Don’t come back with an answer unless you have solid proof for presence or lack of entity – no feels like or seems like, or there is a sense of… These are just more thoughts and thoughts are no proof!

So what exactly can confirm no self?

The… non-self? This feels like another zen koan.

Can anything confirm that, what was never there… , isn’t there?
Is a non-self a thing, a new entity? What does it look like?!
Only a self/thought would demand that proof.
And only thought insists there’s something to confirm.
But isn’t this already it?
Just colour, sensation, thought… - inseparable, whole.
No self required.
No self found. Non-self also not found
And no one ever needed to find it. So who has to live with certainty then??
Love
Rali

[LanieRO]

Hi Rali,

Happy holidays (if you celebrate!) Hope you and yours are doing well. :)

When the label “I am” drops… what’s actually left?
Is that I-am-ness any kind of object or subject? Is it even a human? Is it personal? Or just a sensation?
Is life happening to a being or as being?
Is it what you've taken as "you"?

I love that differentiation between life as being or as happening TO a being. Life is being. That’s all it is. Believing that it’s happening to a being causes such seperateness - you have to stand back and observe the flow from a vantage point and step out of experience and everything that is.

Nothing is left when the label is dropped.

The label of “I am” is perhaps a vantage point or a world view or a lens. Believing or assuming “I am” means viewing life as happening to someone and being quite invested in the well being of that character that is experiencing all of these things.

Dropping the label and the story means stepping into the flow of life and its sensory experiences. Whatever is here, is here.

Drop the label and all that is left is a subtle sensation.
Is anything lost? SEE that, don't just answer!
Or is there still sensation, seeing, aliveness — just without the story? What does thinking about it add?

The difference feels like standing in a river as it flows around me versus sinking into the river and letting it carry me. A visual, dreamlike image of the body dissolving into parts in the river keeps coming up. It’s so much easier to be in the river in smaller parts, than needing to keep the entire organism in tact.

Nothing is lost, except the story that tried to tie the whole thing together. The story took a lot of grasping and straining to hold the parts together and not lose any pieces. Dropping that, it becomes clear that there was no possibility of remembering all the pieces at any one time, and that letting them go is much easier. When a piece is needed, it will be there. When it’s not, it doesn’t need to be held onto.

Right now… what is missing?

Nothing is missing. There is peace and acceptance.

This all feels more like a path than a gate. A gate implies that there is a boundary or border to be crossed and it feels like slowly changing scenery on a path, rather than arriving in a new place.

How is it possible to "maintain" something when you are present?

Okay, good point. “Maintenance” is just a story.

I guess the idea here is at the times where I feel completely unenlightened, overcome by thoughts and stories, and feeling huge amounts of resistance - the point is to just accept that that is what’s happening?

I think this is something that softens over time. I’ve noticed a reduction in my anxiety and impatience and reactivity, and I anticipate this will keep reducing over time. Has that been your experience?

So is that doubt your responsibility to solve then if it’s not yours? LOOK! Are you coming up with these thoughts, are you their thinker? Or they just appear? And these expectations? Did you come up with them too? So how can you solve them if you can’t think about their solution?

It sounds like doubt might just be part of the unwinding.The conditioned mind’s response to a shift is to create expectation and doubt and question everything as it settles.

I can see how doubts and questions and expectations are just arising in response to a shift in seeing.

Who has the doubt??
Does the presence of these thoughts reveal an entity?

Doubt is arising on its own and doesn’t require or reveal anyone who is doubting.

Can anything confirm that, what was never there… , isn’t there?
Is a non-self a thing, a new entity? What does it look like?!

It looks like just life. The image of the body just dissolving into the river comes to mind again here. It becomes smaller and then just reveals that it was only ever a flowing river the whole time and the body was a mirage or a trick of the light.

So of course nothing can confirm it, and there is nothing new appearing.

But isn’t this already it?

Yeah, I guess it is.

So who has to live with certainty then??

Certainty is a thought.

Do I need to be 100% certain about no-self?

[poppyseed]

Hi Lanie,
Happy holidays to you too 💛
Beautiful looking as usual! So let's dig deeper...

Do I need to be 100% certain about no-self?

What a perfect question. But let’s look directly:
Who/what would need to be certain? Who/what needs to know?
The need for certainty is just another thought — one that still suggests there’s a “someone” here who must be sure, who must figure this out and land somewhere solid.
But where is that one?
Can you find the one who is “uncertain”? Or is there just a thought that says “uncertainty” — floating like any other?
What does seeing this (uncertainty/certainty as a thought) makes of your question? What happens to the self that needs to be certain? Does it exist (description please)? What is underneath this question (when dropped)? To whom am I talking to here? 'Lanie' talking to 'Rali', and 'Lanie' needs to be certain? OR there are just two streams of thoughts interacting and influencing each other – reshaping themselves in the process? It's interesting that it is thinking (secondary thoughts) that is keepng this uncertainty loop going, and the way to change this is through thoughts. Yet, you will never think yourself awake. Only seeing/looking can change this - the more looking, the more opportunities for thoughts to reorganise and drop the fairy tales

It looks like just life. The image of the body dissolving into the river comes to mind again here.

That’s beautiful. And maybe it’s not about “being certain” about the river…
It’s just about not stepping back onto the riverbank to check if the river is real.

Let’s use your analogy further.
Imagine for a moment a scene, one of a little mountain stream which is tumbling down a hillside gully, not far from its source. It has been raining and so the level is quite high. See how it flows to the right over a little rock (where, had the level been lower, it would probably have gone around the rock), then the flow goes to the left over a tree bow, and then slows a little in a broader place, before splashing over a small cascade into a pool, and so on down the mountain side. Does it choose any of its directions? Is it even really a separate entity different from the water deposited in it, the rocks, the depressions in the ground etc? Is it even the same entity moment by moment, or more the product of weather conditions and water, like an ever-changing pattern?

Can you find anywhere where “Lanie” autonomously intervenes into life, choosing something that is not the product of all the elements; that is not a part of the overall flow?
Can anything be found for which “Lanie” is responsible – if so responsible to what and for what?

Certainty is a thought.

Exactly. A thought — which appears in what?
In the river. In the flow. Just like doubt. Just like craving. Just like the “gut sense” of “I am.”
All of it: thoughts, sensations, even the seeking for clarity, it all appears in this.
And notice, this doesn’t require maintenance. Nothing breaks when no one is trying to hold it together. There’s no special state to “keep” — only thoughts that suggest there should be.

Nothing is lost, except the story that tried to tie the whole thing together.

Yes. That’s it. And now…
Can anything confirm that what was never there… isn’t there?
It’s like asking for proof that a mirage is gone. The only “proof” is that you’re no longer chasing it.
And isn’t that what’s already happening?
No finish line, no gate to cross — just walking, walking, walking… and realizing the path has always been the scenery itself.

"Crossing the gate" is only a beginning, not an end. You have not crossed the Gate of happy ever after :). No, the Gate is a tiny first step, a very important one, but not a final one by any means. Crossing the Gate is only a step over an imagined line. Nothing changed, but everything looks different. The recognition of no self is just the beginning of seeing life in a new light. It takes time to clean up all the "mess", to settle in and adjust. However, the “mess” does not equate to a potential/possible self – it never was and it will never be. The "mess" is just a matter of a perspective, a play of concepts, a story that needs to be seen.
Love
Rali