The Gate

"I don't know if controlling is the right word but a lot of thoughts seems like they are propelled by fear, or like low key anxiety."

That is true.

All my questions are not about the intricate relations of feelings, thoughts and behavior. They are only about looking if there is a separate self and if there is any aspects of experience that is under the control of or come from a separate self. Our work here should be focused on that.

Everything else we will talk more about after LU.

What is Synes?

Synes is a name, one of my names. A name is something that we use to identify people. A person is an idea or a tool based on languange and convention and beliefs and utility and so on and so forth. It's a place holder that can (theoretically) be filled with whatever we feel like, from all different directions and perspectives.

What is separation?

Separation is an idea, a concept and also in a way a fundamental principal. I just noticed that it mirrors my description of what a person is. It's a way of engaging with the world based on thought. It's a way of cutting up things in my experience according to convention, belief and utility.

I often seem to have a hard time looking behind it, or inside it, or beyond it. Despite using it seemingly all the time. Or maybe because of it.

It's a way of dividing and controlling and distracting and experiencing.

What is clear and simple, something even a baby or a 7 year old could potentially see?

Existence, the simple fact that I am.

[quote=WoollyShower post_id=387286 time=1709586613

"Synes is a name, one of my names. A name is something that we use to identify people. A person is an idea"

Right


"Separation is an idea, a concept"

Right

"It's a way of engaging with the world based on thought."

Right

"It's a way of cutting up things in (-my) experience according to convention, belief"

Ok

"I often seem to have a hard time looking behind it, or inside it, or beyond it."

Can an illusion see through an illusion?


"What is clear and simple, something even a baby or a 7 year old could potentially see?

Existence, the simple fact that I am."


Existence, yes. "Am" yes

I? What is this I that am?

What is direct perception:

"My existence" or "existence"?

Can an illusion see through an illusion?

An Illusion cannot see, so no. Also an illusion per definition does not exist.

Existence, yes. "Am" yes

I? What is this I that am?

You're right, a better way to say it is "existence, the simple fact that experience is happening"

A baby very likely doesn't have a concept of "I" yet :D

To me "I" in this case is a useful shorthand for making clear that I'm talking about my own experience instead of making general statements.

Is there another way to say that that doesn't sound so vague? I mean we are having a conversation and yes my use of "I" is quite habitual. But how would you phrase it?

What is direct perception:

"My existence" or "existence"?

Direct perception is existence. The "I" is not required for direct perception to happen. It's a thought...

Can an illusion see through an illusion?

An Illusion cannot see, so no. Also an illusion per definition does not exist.

Existence, yes. "Am" yes

I? What is this I that am?

You're right, a better way to say it is "existence, the simple fact that experience is happening"

A baby very likely doesn't have a concept of "I" yet :D

To me "I" in this case is a useful shorthand for making clear that I'm talking about my own experience instead of making general statements.

Is there another way to say that that doesn't sound so vague? I mean we are having a conversation and yes my use of "I" is quite habitual. But how would you phrase it?

What is direct perception:

"My existence" or "existence"?

Direct perception is existence. The "I" is not required for direct perception to happen. It's a thought...

Great this is quite clear. Yes we say I for conversational purposes. I am checking your clarity. Once you feel clear, you can say whatever feels helpful in the moment.

I think you might be ready for the final questions of LU. How does that sound to you?

After the final questions maybe we will do more work here if needed, and maybe other guides will have thoughts on how further to clarify the seeing, when they review the answers.

Once we finish with all that, you and I can happily stay in touch, and talk about options to continue clarification and deconditioning of unhelpful patters. Seeing through the separate self/doer/controller/chooser is an important step but by no means the end of evolving and exploring.

Yes so the curious thing is that there is seeing and understanding. But it is not fully integrated yet.

There is still a subtle expectation that some profound insight is to come, for this to become part of the day to day lived experience.

That there should be some kind of shift or implications as a result of this seeing.

Like nobody is doing the thinking, yes, that is clear. Yet there is still identification with thoughts. Ok so but you said earlier that this will also fall away some more over time.

Then there is a lot of ruminating happening about what this life will/should/can/does look like without anyone living it. And we also went through that together.

Yes, if you say that it's time let's take a look at those questions :)

"There is still a subtle expectation that some profound insight is to come, for this to become part of the day to day lived experience.

That there should be some kind of shift or implications as a result of this seeing."

1) be more explicit. What changes and shift are still expected?

"Like nobody is doing the thinking, yes, that is clear. Yet there is still identification with thoughts. Ok so but you said earlier that this will also fall away some more over time."

2) Are thoughts the self or controlled by the self? Only direct experience.

"Then there is a lot of ruminating happening about what this life will/should/can/does look like without anyone living it."

3) Are these thoughts a self or controlled by a self?

4) are some thoughts, beliefs and expectations more a self or controlled by a self then other thoughts and beliefs?

1) be more explicit. What changes and shift are still expected?

Right now: When looking, it is seen that thoughts are just happening, that nobody is doing any thinking.When not looking, beliefs about there being a thinker and the implications of that are still mostly intact.

Expectation: a shift is supposed to happen that that same seeing also will be clear when not looking. That there "should" be some effect of this seeing in my every day life. These expectations range from "no thoughts should be happening" to "something about the fundamental understanding of life or self should shift that has some vague but very very big impact" (the ruminating I referred to).

What happened in post #100 after managing to really look for "Can it be verified in direct experience that there is someone doing the thinking?" that that level of seeing is supposed to be permanent and stable.

For that to happen I think the best path of action is to answer this same question daily. Cause the identification with thought is so profound that this one time we managed to punch a small hole but I guess it needs some more regular demolition work for that building to fall for reasons I elaborated earlier.

-> But then again if the point of LU is just to teach the basics of seeing then yes. I see it and there is no doubt that this is true. <-

The question is more "what now". What does it "mean". What "should" be the implications of this seeing.

Like ok, we looked at thoughts and everything else and it's just happening. And that's super cool and interesting. But then there are so many deep open questions about the implications of this. (the ruminating I mentioned)

Like shouldn't something be changing after seeing this? I mean how can there be a self if there's nobody doing it and why do I believe I have a choice in anything and why are there thoughts about planning stuff still constantly running around my head like they didn't get the memo or did I misunderstand something?

This is all more because of the deeply held belief of being inherently broken. I have been conditioned that I am wrong and I need to DO something in order to be right. That I need to be fast, where I'm slow. That I need to be slow where I'm fast.

There is this belief coming up that it has to be a struggle, that I'm arrogant if I belief this is it. That I might have done something wrong. It's just doubt.

But why bother doing anything if everything is happening on it's own? There is a bit sense of depression and hopelessness here. And overwhelm.

I'm sorry, since the operation my mood is in a bit of rollercoaster. Going all over the place. I am in a timeless place letting go of needing to identify with achievement/doing. There are so many things simultaneously happening and nothing at all. I am stuck at home and I managed to fix our dishwasher after couple of failed attempts and I'm so proud of that. I wasn't really thinking about it, but there was still my typical stubbornness of trying some way each day a bit (out of joy and curiosity), but not identified with any story of doing. And then the next day being drawn to it again. And again the next day. Until today everything just fell into place and I found a way to solve the problem.

But there is also still this background noise of achievement and a deafening sense of loneliness. Getting offers to engage with other's hooks of X (craving/aversion) but not feeling it (to engage with it).

"Like nobody is doing the thinking, yes, that is clear. Yet there is still identification with thoughts. Ok so but you said earlier that this will also fall away some more over time."

2) Are thoughts the self or controlled by the self? Only direct experience.

I've been coming back to this question all day, again and again. This one was rather hard today. First the tendency to jump over and answer the question without really looking. Then looking and finding confusion and resistence. Thoughts are the self.

Now giving it another try last chance before sleeping. Thoughts are definitively not controlled by the self. They aren't controlled by anything. I've seen that before. I'll look again now. No they are not controlled and also I do not find a self when looking at thoughts. There is distraction, a tendency to get lost in thoughts. But no self there.

"Then there is a lot of ruminating happening about what this life will/should/can/does look like without anyone living it."

3) Are these thoughts a self or controlled by a self?

No. They are some rumbling in the background that are looking for some explanation or some understanding of what is supposed to happen next. They are trying to "be ready" to "understand" what is going to happen next.

4) are some thoughts, beliefs and expectations more a self or controlled by a self then other thoughts and beliefs?

No, definitely not. There's no way I could even see that they are because if I'm looking directly thoughts just happen spontaneously and continuously.

Good clarity with the questions. Re expectations, let's see if we can get more clarity.

Try for the next day to go back to believing in a separate self and in agency. After one day write me what has been seen.

And before that, I think you watched this video, but if not, please do and let me know what it evokes. And after that, do the exercise with "going back".

https://youtu.be/z2g4qaDGpTU?si=_gAEz8OrJ8scu2Ao

I haven't watched it yet, but I'll take a look at it tomorrow.

Can you explain the other exercise a bit more?

Thaanks

I haven't watched it yet, but I'll take a look at it tomorrow.

Can you explain the other exercise a bit more?

Thaanks

More explanation for that exercise would be counter productive. As would probably you trying to understand the logic of it rather then just doing it and reporting.

"Looking at the experience of what the "I" is. Taking an honest look. Not about thoughts. Not about quiet time. Can happen anytime. Nothing that needs to happen."

Understood

"Let go of all beliefs. Not something learned. Something to see."

Yes

"The knowing that you have truly seen through "self" is truly yours. Otherwise this would be persuasion, not investigation."

This is the thing that trips me up. Like saying there is no self but then referring to self by saying "yours" in the same sentence.

"The final "done" is a fictional story for the "I" to get somewhere"

So much paradox in this process. Using language to see something beyond or before language. :D

"there is no done in the real world. If you want to be at home, be at home in the flow"

Yes.

"the person looking for security doesnt exist, need for security and the need for finding answers falls away too"

Great

"once belief in a solid controlling self is dropped, it is seen there wasn't anything to do because nothing could be done"

It's not about doing, it's about being. About existence. Makes a lot of sense.

"not about states or oneness, not about fleeting state that comes and goes."

Ok. This is helpful. There is a sense of efforting there, of having to do.

"how would the world change if you didn't exist. What if everything that seemed to be you was seen to be an illusion?"

What comes up is that "I" = my body and my life story. If I didn't exist the imagination then tries to subtract that from the rest of life and the world. What other way is there to understand this question? The other option is that my experience wouldn't exist. Like would I observe my life from the outside like a movie? This question is still quite random to me. There seem to be two standards of what qualifies an "I" here. One is dropped and another one that will keep going on.

"Expectations are nothing more that thoughts."

Yes, that makes sense. Letting thoughts do their thing without identifying with them. Like watching a movie while still being aware of the surroundings.

"you will not disappear, you never were in the first place"

Then what's the point of this process?

There is some before and after. There is a journey from A to B. A are the things that have been seen. B is what is not yet seen.

A) Looking.

- Existence. But no "I"
- There is only ever now.
- Seeing what is real when you are not subject to the "I" illusion.
- I am not the body, feeling or thoughts.
- No separation. No in here, no out there.
- Look closely at the most precious beliefs that are most close to the heart. Those in the no-touch zone. (follow the feeling of resistence)
- Does a tree or a bug mean anything? Does life need a meaning to carry on lifeing? Humans seek for meaning and put one where there isn't just to feel special. What is specialness? Uniqueness is at the core of everything.
- Do you need to seek meaning in order to be unique? No knowledge, experience or insight that will satisfy you. There is no you.
- Dissatisfaction with what is, is the essence of the illusory self. The self exists in appearance due to that very dissatisfaction.

B) Realisation

- There is only a change in perception. When you really see that the "I" is an illusion.
- Experiencing life directly, instead of a filter, without being caught up in the stories I tell myself about myself.
- Everything becomes very simple. The world of words and concepts no longer clutters everything
- The whole universe is one unified existence that is in a constant state of transformation and change and movement and functioning. Seamless flow of forms.
- Feelings, thoughts, judgments, obsessions of experiences are all a part of the flow of life. Freedom is realising that all this is happening to no-one.
- Thought will continue to happen.
- Freedom is not hidden, it's just a shift in perspective.
- Less stickiness to emotions.
- Seeing no-self is like seeing the diagnostic manual for suffering. The root of the problem is a thought.
- Waking up from a dream.
- Feeling that whatever you are is vastly different than what you have previously assumed to be.
- Feeling of wonder.
- See how powerful the illusion created by the mind is. (it's called non-duality but then there is still the mind and the illusion "it creates." Is that distinction helpful or is it in the way?)

Is there something missing to get to B? For this permanent change of perception to manifest?

Good clarity with the questions. Re expectations, let's see if we can get more clarity.

Try for the next day to go back to believing in a separate self and in agency. After one day write me what has been seen.

I mean this seems obvious to me there is nothing I can do to change my belief in the self. How do I "believe" in a separate self. What can I "do" to make that happen?

Or agency. Like there is the belief of agency. I can investigate it but all that does is have more thoughts arise.

I will try to keep "doing" or more like pondering that throughout the day but it seems pointless to me.