The Gate

in the seeing, there is only the existence of seeing
awareness of 'existence of seeing' is the evidence of awareness

in the experience, there is only the existence of the experience
awareness of 'existence of the experience' is the evidence of awareness

i sat and looked and looked without the mind/thoughts/labels.

a slight change.

in the experience, there is only the existence of the experience
awareness of 'existence of the experience' is the evidence that there is only awareness

Hi Vikas,

Beautiful! How does it feel to see this?

Only answer these questions if you want to... (if there is doubt about the answer)

in the experience, there is only the existence of the experience

Everything is happening. Thoughts, emotions, and sensations come and go light and free like clouds in the sky. Where's the self in this, the thing that makes everything feel heavy? Isn't that just an experience in which a thought is believed?

awareness of 'existence of the experience' is the evidence that there is only awareness

Is life happening to someone or something, or is the experiencer merely a thought that happens within and as experience?

in the experience of seeing, the vantage point of the seeing can be shifted (to the tree, to the sky, etc). the mind labels this particular experience as an "observation"

Does a self control attention, or does attention move + thoughts about a self moving it?


Steve

hi Steve

yes, experiencer is another thought within the experience.

i think i need to settle in this for a day.

thanks

Vikas,

I would wish you a good day, but it seems a little out of place. :)


Steve

hi Steve

I am reminded of a statement, someone made on LU, i think ...

"non-duality is killing me"

this is true on multiple levels.

Will write everyday and keep you informed on what is going on.

thanks

my 'holy cow' moment is actually seeing the intricate deception of thoughts.

oh, what a tangled web they weave
when thoughts first start to conceive

WOW !

Hi Vikas,

That's great! Tell me more, including how you're feeling.

Yes, thoughts have this way of creating intricate structures that look real. It's truly amazing how it works. Thoughts aren't all words, but they're ALL just narrative.

Non-duality jokes:

Knock knock
Who's there?
No-one!

How many non-dualists does it take to change a light bulb?
None. The changing of the light bulb is just happening.

When's the best time to tell someone about "no self"?
When you're driving. Then you get to say, "THERE'S NO-ONE DRIVING THIS CAR!"


Steve

hi Steve

on feeling ...

the succinct way to describe how I am feeling is that: "feeling has less meaning".

I am OK. neither happy, nor sad. no extreme reactions/feelings.

more this evening.

hi steve

spent the day at work, after a long long weekend ...

there was distinctly more joy, more engagement in the interactions with people.

Hi Vikas,

Looks like you're doing fine.

As for the question about how you feel, I am just checking you out. There's no particular way you should feel, as there's a huge variation in how this goes for people.

I should tell you one thing you might experience. Around this point, flip-flopping between expansive and contracted states is very common - the experience of "I had it, and now I lost it." Mental states will come and go. Don't try to recapture a state. This doesn't work. But - looking works. Experiential confirmation is important, but this is all about what's true, not how you feel in a given moment. If you "lose it", keep looking and asking the same old questions: What's really here? Is there a self here?

Keep l00kiNg and I'll talk to you soon!


Steve

what does it mean to be something?

"something" exists only in the mind, it is a creation of thoughts. hence one can be something only in the mind.

to try to be "something" seems like the root of most human conflict.

my 2 c

vikas

Hi Vikas,

Yes - I think you're quite right there.

There isn't much more I can comment on so I'll wait for your cue.


Steve

hi Steve

an 'active thinker' (AT) has emerged. I used those specific words because, to me, 'observer' implies some degree of passiveness/disinterest. Here is what happens. In my interactions with people, the AT is trying to understand the story/narrative that those people have told themselves. it is evident that the stories people tell themselves are self-fulfilling - the story drives the behavior and the behavior reinforces the story. not only people, AT started thinking about cultures and the narratives they told themselves. (eg: canadian athletes tell themselves that 'participation' is the reward. while athletes in the US tell themselves that 'they are the best'. the results are predictable. Native Indians might say 'we are with nature' and Indians (from India) might say 'we need to survive, get ahead'.) the story/narrative affects generations to come.

AT is examining the stories I have told myself. (man, indian, be good, be something, etc) and trying to understand the root cause or the first point of emergence of those stories.

Please let me know your thoughts. Whether an AT is to be expected at this time in the journey. there is no strong sense of "me/self", just a questioning of what has caused 'this'.

Hi Vikas,

There are two parts to this: Getting the mind out of the way so you can look, and looking. Thinking can be useful for the first one. It seems to me that's what you're doing: Deconstructing the thought structure.

Ultimately thought is an entirely self-contained fantasy world. It's a maze that goes on forever - with infinite Byzantine intricacy - and leads nowhere. The bad news is that there is NO ESCAPE from the world of thought. None whatsoever. The good news is that the walls are not real. The maze is made out of thought content, which is the same stuff that the Easter Bunny is made out of.

So note carefully - deconstructing thought processes will only take you so far, and will in itself lead nowhere. To succeed in this process you have to make that step of not believing any of them, so that you can really look.

So - thinking is fine, as long as you understand what I have said here.

Experience consists of the content of the senses + thought (including emotion, etc). Thought content constructs a conceptual overlay that - when believed - reduces experience down to less than it really is. The Tao-Te-Ching puts it like this:

The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named is not the eternal name
The nameless is the origin of Heaven and Earth
The named is the mother of myriad things
Thus, constantly without desire, one observes its essence
Constantly with desire, one observes its manifestations
These two emerge together but differ in name
The unity is said to be the mystery
Mystery of mysteries, the door to all wonders
(www.taoism.net)

You can't make the conceptual overlay go away, but you can look and carefully separate the facts of the senses from the thoughts that seem to be stuck to them. Only when you can do that can you see that what is right in front of you is not at all what thought says it is.


Steve