The Gate

Hi Fritz,

If there is NO self already how can you see something which doesn't exist?


love.
Luchana

Hi Luchana,

For me the Self does exist. But I don't say I can 'see' it, I say I can 'feel' it.

If someone doesn't use my language, then I can't understand them and they can't understand me. The word 'see' has no meaning for me with regard to the Self. I don't understand how one could 'see' a Self, because it's not a visual object. So therefore the fact that I can't 'see' a Self does not mean that it does not exist.

If someone says they do not 'feel' the Self, then I must accept that they are describing their experience. But that's not my experience. When I investigate as carefully as I can, I 'feel' the Self. If someone else does not, then that is their experience.

Hi Fritz,

For me the Self does exist. But I don't say I can 'see' it, I say I can 'feel' it.

Is there a problem with feeling that?

How do you know it is a self?

What makes you come back here again and again?

A body? A head? A self?

Love,
Luchana

Is there a problem with feeling that?

I suppose there really isn't a problem with feeling that I am a self. If I had never read anything about Nonduality, or Liberation Unleashed, or all that spiritual stuff, I wouldn't report a problem with not seeing that there is no self. I would just assume that this is how life is, and there's nothing I can do about it. But because so many people I respect say that it's an advantage to see that there is No Self, I feel like I want to know what that is like.

What makes you come back here again and again?

I notice that I come back here again and again maybe once a month, or once every 2 months. I suppose that means that for the most part I don't believe I will ever succeed (at seeing there is no self), but I can never QUITE get rid of the curiosity about it. One might say that I'm SLIGHTLY curious about seeing No-Self. Ramana Maharshi said that once your head is in the tiger's mouth you can never escape. Which might mean that once you hear that there is No Self, and that other people on Liberation Unleashed know this, you can never quite lose the desire. But for me that desire is just not as great as years ago when I watched every Youtube video and went on every meditation retreat.

Hi Fritz,

and welcome back.

I suppose that means that for the most part I don't believe I will ever succeed (at seeing there is no self), but I can never QUITE get rid of the curiosity about it. One might say that I'm SLIGHTLY curious about seeing No-Self.

Good. Now, the question is

HOW CAN YOU SEE SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T EXIST?

Stay with the question for a day or two, use it as a koan.

Let me know what you find.

Love,
Luchana

Good. Now, the question is

HOW CAN YOU SEE SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T EXIST?

Stay with the question for a day or two, use it as a koan.

Let me know what you find.

I FEEL the Self. That's how I know it exists. I always wonder why people ask "Can you see the Self?" because of course you can't. You also can't see love, or gravity, or space. But they exist. I FEEL them. So when people claim the Self does not exist, all I can say is "I respect what you say. If you say that 'You' are not a Self, I must accept your statement. But just because it's true for you, does not make it true for me.

Love,
Fritz

Hi Fritz.

I FEEL the Self. That's how I know it exists.

There is a feeling,YES.

But how it is known that this feeling is a self, you?

Does a feeling suggest anything?
Be gentle and curious with it.

Does the feeling know anything?
Where the conviction comes from?

Love,
Luchana

There is a feeling,YES.

But how it is known that this feeling is a self, you?

Does a feeling suggest anything?
Be gentle and curious with it.

Does the feeling know anything?
Where the conviction comes from?

Love,
Luchana

Feeling I am a self means I am a self. There is no other way to describe it. There is no other way to investigate it. If I feel I am a self, then I am a self. It's like if you ask me "How do you know you love your partner? It's just a FEELING. How do you know it's really Love?" I would say, "Maybe you're right. Maybe love is just a FEELING. But that's enough. There is no way to investigate it more, and I don't even want to." Same with the self. "Does a feeling suggest anything?" No. It doesn't need to. Whether it suggests anything or not does not mean it's not a self. "Does a feeling know anything?" Probably not. But I don't care. It's a self just because it feels like a self. It needs no other proof. "Where does the conviction come from?" I don't know. And even if I did, it would not change the fact that I feel I am a Self.
Unfortunately, Feeling is all I have. Even the sense that I am alive is just a feeling. Maybe other people are smarter than me, or more sensitive than me, and they can 'see' that a Feeling is not a self. But not me. If I feel I am a Self, then that is just the way it is.

Love,
Fritz

Hi Fritz,

Thank you for sharing so honestly.
And yes, it’s true: the feeling is real. It's happening. No one can deny that.
But the invitation here in this inquiry isn't to deny the feeling—it’s to gently look at what it actually points to.

"I feel like a self" - that’s absolutely valid as an experience. The question isn’t whether the feeling exists, but what is the feeling referring to? Does it refer to something solid, separate, enduring—or is it simply a sensation, a pattern of thought and emotion arising?

In the same way that the feeling of love is beautiful and meaningful, but doesn't necessarily define a permanent, objective truth outside of experience, the feeling of self doesn't necessarily confirm a fixed, separate entity.

And maybe it’s not about being smarter or more sensitive. Maybe it's just about noticing—not denying the feeling, but seeing what else is quietly, always here.

No rush. No force. Just an invitation to look—not to prove or disprove—but to see what's actually true now.

Love,
Luchana

In the same way that the feeling of love is beautiful and meaningful, but doesn't necessarily define a permanent, objective truth outside of experience, the feeling of self doesn't necessarily confirm a fixed, separate entity.

For me the feeling of self DOES confirm a fixedl separate entity. It's actually the most solid thing I know. I suspect the existence of everything else, because nothing else has the same solidity.

Maybe it's just about noticing—not denying the feeling, but seeing what else is quietly, always here.

If it were really about noticing, I would have noticed it by now. I don't believe there is anything else quietly always here.

Love,
Fritz

Hi Fritz,

For me the feeling of self DOES confirm a fixedl separate entity. It's actually the most solid thing I know. I suspect the existence of everything else, because nothing else has the same solidity.

Good. That’s the lie. That's the exact knot that needs to be cut.

So let’s cut it—right now. Don’t think and don’t analyze. LOOK.

That solid feeling of self—you say it's the most real.
Ok. Where is it?

Don’t give a concept. Don’t say “in my head” or “behind the eyes.” That’s more story.
I want you to go to the very feeling you’re referring to. Right now. Stop reading and go to it.

Feel it.

Now tell me:
Is there an actual thing there? Something with borders, with substance? Or is it just a dense clump of sensation and thoughts ABOUT it?

Look again. Is the solid self anything more than a thought saying “this is me”?
What makes that more real than any other thought?

Push further.

Hold your finger to your forehead. Press. That sensation—is that you?
Now ask: what’s doing the pressing, and what’s being pressed? Two things? Or just sensation?

You’ve been taking the story of solidity as proof. But stories can feel like concrete if they’re repeated enough.

What happens if you stop assuming that this solid self is you—and just feel what’s here, without labeling?

Sending love,
Luchana

Is there an actual thing there? Something with borders, with substance? Or is it just a dense clump of sensation and thoughts ABOUT it?

Borders? No, can't find any. Substance? Yes, it feels pretty Substantial. Dense clump of sensation? That might be accurate. The main point is that it feels REAL. Thoughts ABOUT it? When I descend into a deep meditative state the only thing I feel is the Self. No thoughts.

Look again. Is the solid self anything more than a thought saying “this is me”?
What makes that more real than any other thought?

What makes it more real than any other thought is that when all other thoughts subside, it is still there. Even after hours of meditation it is still there; it never leaves.

And I am not the only one who says this. Nisagardatta Maharaj said "All is secondary to the tiny little thing which is the 'I am'. Without the 'I am' there is nothing. All knowledge is about the 'I am'. False ideas about this 'I am' lead to bondage, right knowledge leads to freedom and happiness."

If he and many others had not said things like this, I might be inclined to think that I am INSANE, because the Self is so real to me.

Hold your finger to your forehead. Press. That sensation—is that you?
Now ask: what’s doing the pressing, and what’s being pressed? Two things? Or just sensation?

Just sensation. But that doesn't provide evidence that there is no self.

You’ve been taking the story of solidity as proof. But stories can feel like concrete if they’re repeated enough.

This is true. But I have been listening to people who say there is no Self, like Liberation Unleashed, for MANY MORE YEARS than I was building up a separate self as a child. So LU stories have been repeated a lot more. I never had any incentive or desire to believe in a Separate Self, and a LOT of desire to see that it doesn't exist.

What happens if you stop assuming that this solid self is you—and just feel what’s here, without labeling?

I don't assume it is me. I feel it. There is absolutely no advantage for me to believe in a separate self. If I could see that it doesn't exist by dropping assuming, or dropping labeling, I would have done so many years ago.

Love,
Fritz

Hi Fritz.
Let's look here:

I don't assume it is me. I feel it.

Good. Now look exactly where that “I” feeling is.

Don’t touch a thought. Don’t describe it. Feel it.

Right now.

Is there any thing there that owns or generates that feeling?

Or is there just a vague contraction, interpreted and labeled “me”?


Love,
Luchana

Hi Luchana,

Good. Now look exactly where that “I” feeling is.

Don’t touch a thought. Don’t describe it. Feel it.

Right now.

Is there any thing there that owns or generates that feeling?

No, there isn't any thing that owns or generates that feeling. It is basic, primal, alone, not dependent on anything else.

Or is there just a vague contraction, interpreted and labeled “me”?

It is not 'vague'. It is the most real thing I know. Is it a contraction? I don't know, that is not a word I would use. To me a 'contraction' is not ALIVE, and the self I feel is very much alive.

Is it interpreted and labeled "me"? Those words imply taking a step away from reality to apply thought to the I. When I feel it, I can eliminate all words like "me", "I", and "Self" and I still feel it. So there is no label and no interpretation.

Love,
Fritz

Hi Fritz.

You say the self you feel is "very much alive"—so stay exactly there. No words, no descriptions, no retreat into concepts.

Now look directly: in that immediate, vivid alive-ness, is there a center?


Scan the entire field of experience—not for "what it is," but for where the boundary is between this vivid alive-ness and what it supposedly belongs to.

You say it isn’t a label, and not a thought—good. Then what is it, without any reference to the story?


That felt aliveness—does it need to belong to anyone?

If there’s no boundary, and no ownership—what’s left to be "me"?

Don't think for the answer. Look.

Feel the edge where the sense of aliveness ends and something else begins.

Can you find one?

If not, what’s the substance of the one who claims to feel it?


Love,
Luchana