The Gate

Justin,

No worries at all, Justin, thank you for the heads up.

Life is always trying to wake you up to what is real. Don’t fight it. This isn’t halting your clear seeing, it’s the fuel for it. You probably didn’t ask for this overwhelming period, and you can’t wish it away. Look now for the ‘one’ who is overwhelmed. All you find is scattered thoughts and sensations - are these ‘you’? Keep looking for the controller, the manager, the “I” that only appears in the thought world. Look in your direct experience and see how everything is happening beyond your control… It’s just a thought that says otherwise.

Peace and smooth sailing,
Gunnar

Hey, Gunnar!
Didn't take me long to emerge again this time ... Thanks for understanding...
Without further ado...

Can you allow 'not allowing everything to be just as it is' to be just as it is? ;)

This is a tricky one.
The answer is, yes, I can allow that.
But ... Am I not doing it already - allowing non-allowance?
Is it the same to say "I am fine with allowing resistance to be."?
Or is this just a koan-like question? :)
It got me thinking ... "But who is allowing it? I??? How can that be if there is none?"

So here's an exercise for this: Find a phrase that hits home to the core of this matter. It may be something like: "I'm a failure", "I'm messed up" "I'm defected" "I'm not good enough", "I'm unlovable", "i'm incapable".

Choose one and sit down in a comfortable posture and calmly recite the words in your mind. See/feel/hear what arises...

I cannot differentiate between the self that is perceiving with the thing perceived.
For example...
I did the exercise and I managed to boil down my tendency to people-please to the following statement:
"There is the perception of fear regarding the displeasure of others".
The perception and the self that has the perception are kinda same. I can't separate them. They arise within the same awareness - self and perception of sensations.
Now ... I came across some difficulties with the terms that we are using...
When I refer to "self", I mean the individual false self, the ego.
But parts of me take it to mean "my environment" as well. Then it kind of can be termed Self, with a capital S.
The "I" is becoming blurry ... I didn't experience this before...

So we by "self" mean "ego/personality structure/false self"?

Can you allow 'not allowing everything to be just as it is' to be just as it is? ;)

This is a tricky one.
The answer is, yes, I can allow that. Am I not doing it already - allowing non-allowance?
Is it the same to say "I am fine with allowing resistance to be."?
Or is this just a koan-like question? :)
It got me thinking ... "But who is allowing it? I? How can that be if there is none?"

Do you have any control over this apparatus? Does it have any consistency or solidity? If the answer is no to these questions, how is this apparatus different from something like the clouds in the sky, the tree out the window, the table in front of you? Are all these things equally not who 'you' are?

That would be like saying, the body-mind has control over itself. And no, it doesn't have the control over perceiving. Perceiving is just happening.
The body seems to have consistency and solidity (at least in my DE). The mind has consistency. No matter how much they change or have changed throughout the years, the experience of those seem to be a consistency. There are still "me".
How is it different? Well... to be honest, it is here, and everything else is there. Conceptually I know this to be incorrect, but, my experience says that we are not the same. The clouds, the trees, the table are not who "I" am.
(My mind is shrieking, "but they ARE you! They are the extensions of you! All is Consciousness!" But my DE isn't telling me that.)

What happens when... you just... stop... fighting... what is??? How does the mind get off the carousel? What do you think?

It is the mind/ego that fights itself. Who can stop fighting if I am not the one doing the fighting? Fighting occurs. Is that so?
And, as you say, there is just this bouncing back and forth, creating an illusion that there is a fight going on.
The "carousel" was just a figure of speech. Maybe it only works in my native language. :) But to answer the question: the mind IS the carousel. It doesn't get off of itself.



And what about my answer to your question:
Q: There's not a 'you' doing the seeing. Seeing is just happening. Look. Who is reading this right now?
A: There is no real subject reading this. Reading happens within illusion. Illusion is being observed.
Is this correct?

Just to see clearly what you are describing, but no one is doing the seeing.

I don't understand this.
You say, "no one is doing the seeing."
What do you mean by "seeing"? I cannot seem to find where I've used that term.
To me, "seeing" means using the senses - the eyes, or imagination - the mind's eye; and "observing" is more encompassing. Unattached observer means to me "a presence that is taking it all in - the whole experience, and not just seeing. The "voyeur".
"Seeing" is certainly happening in the mind, by the mind, but there is also observing the mind happening.
Are we on the same page? :)

Tell me if this resonates: You are taking all the parts of the body/mind that you don't like and calling them 'Justin', and then taking all the parts of the body/mind that you do like (ones that care about generosity, non-harming, integrity, etc.) and thinking of them or feeling them as 'me', the 'good guy', the 'one that should be heeded', 'THE CONTROLLER' , 'the manager'.

Well, yes and no. It feels more like two twins (or even more of them) and they all are Justin, just different parts/aspects of him.



I would like to go through some terms that we are using:
By "control"... what do you mean?
I take it to mean "the power to influence something or someone" and "voluntary action".
And then (from this forum):"In the context of Liberation Unleashed, liberation refers to the clear, unambiguous and direct realisation of the absence of a separate self."
So, "liberation" doesn't have to do anything with Truth-realization (as coined by Jed McKenna) or realization of No-self/Anata?



It is such a difficulty for me to engage in any kind of inquiry when I am in that overwhelming state. It is a mixture of sadness, anger, regret, anxiety, etc. All overwhelming, since it is stretching out throughout my whole being, including the surroundings, people, past, future and present, me, parts of me, the observer, desires, fears ... All gets entangled and it just loops and loops and loops in and out in and out... The best thing that I can do is to do nothing and wait for it to pass.
I liken it to diving... When those periods arise, I know that Self is diving down through the caves and the mud and muck of ego, looking for clues, doors, and keys. Then, when it collects all the nasty things, it goes back to the surface and sorts it out... which I am doing now.
Thank you for your patience. I believe you know how it is. Must have been a tough ride for you as well.
Congratulations for crashing through the Gate, by the way. I would love to ask you some questions about the "other side" sometime, if that's ok with "you"... :D

With gratitude,
Justin Case

Justin,

Didn't take me long to emerge again this time ... Thanks for understanding...
Without further ado...

Glad to hear. Try and look back at that moment or transition where you knew the flavor of your emotional/mental experience was in the phase of emergence. Did 'you' make that transition happen, or did you just start to notice 'hey, things are becoming lighter internally'?

Can you allow 'not allowing everything to be just as it is' to be just as it is? ;)
This is a tricky one.
The answer is, yes, I can allow that.
But ... Am I not doing it already - allowing non-allowance?
Is it the same to say "I am fine with allowing resistance to be."?
Or is this just a koan-like question? :)
It got me thinking ... "But who is allowing it? I??? How can that be if there is none?"

Your questions are superb. Look for yourself and tell me what you find. Who is doing the allowing? How can that be if there is no one?

So we by "self" mean "ego/personality structure/false self"?

Yes. The 'self' or sense of a separate entity that is controlling things, operating this body, thinking thoughts, taking action, etc.

But parts of me take it to mean "my environment" as well. Then it kind of can be termed Self, with a capital S.

Sure, fair enough. Not important though for this exploration together. We are just looking at the illusion of the small separate self.

The "I" is becoming blurry ... I didn't experience this before...

Go into direct experience of this again and write more about this. Don't try to conceptually understand it or engage with questions about it - that's going back up into the world of thought. Just describe your direct experience of it to me as best you can.

I cannot differentiate between the self that is perceiving with the thing perceived.
For example...
I did the exercise and I managed to boil down my tendency to people-please to the following statement:
"There is the perception of fear regarding the displeasure of others".
The perception and the self that has the perception are kinda same. I can't separate them. They arise within the same awareness - self and perception of sensations.

Same things as above. Go back into DE and tell me more about this.

That would be like saying, the body-mind has control over itself. And no, it doesn't have the control over perceiving. Perceiving is just happening.
The body seems to have consistency and solidity (at least in my DE). The mind has consistency. No matter how much they change or have changed throughout the years, the experience of those seem to be a consistency. There are still "me".
How is it different? Well... to be honest, it is here, and everything else is there. Conceptually I know this to be incorrect, but, my experience says that we are not the same. The clouds, the trees, the table are not who "I" am.
(My mind is shrieking, "but they ARE you! They are the extensions of you! All is Consciousness!" But my DE isn't telling me that.)

Conceptual understanding is okay for now - it will continue to guide our looking into DE. Your honesty is important, it gives us cues as to where we need to look. So try these exercises and tell me about your experience:

-------------
Sit with eyes closed for about 15 minutes.
Paying attention only to the pure sensations, without relying on thoughts or mental images:

Can it be known how tall the body is?
Does the body have a weight or volume?
In the actual experience does the body have a shape or a form?

Is there a boundary between the body and the clothing?
Is there a boundary between the body and the chair?

Is there an inside or an outside?
If there is an inside - the inside of what exactly?
If there is an outside - the outside of what exactly?

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to?
What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

Look very carefully, especially with the last question. Take your time, don’t rush. You can look several times during the day while doing other things (like washing hands, showering, having a short break from work, walking, etc) before replying.

------------

And then I'd like you to try this one at some point:

-------------

Sense of “Self/Me/I”
Find “me” in the body

Find a comfortable place to sit or lie.
Take in a few deep breaths to settle the dust and then relax for a bit.

Spend only 30 to 60 seconds on each component of this exercise.

Bring your awareness to your entire body - sense it fully, head to toe.
Run your hands down over your torso. Feel the solidity of it.
Now bring your awareness to your feet. Again, feel them. Move them a bit.
Then bring your awareness to your hands. Open and close them.
Bring your awareness to your face - all of it. Touch it with your hand.
Now point your index finger to where "insert name" is located.
Touch the exact location of "insert name".

Answer these questions:

Were you able to find and feel "insert name" in a direct way like the other parts of your body?
Where is it?
What did you find? Something? Anything? Nothing?
What sensations did you feel in your body that identified "insert name” (If any).

Tell me what you experienced and found, by way of direct experience.

---------------

It is the mind/ego that fights itself. Who can stop fighting if I am not the one doing the fighting? Fighting occurs.

Nice reflection, I resonate. Please read this piece of writing of yours a few more times. Let it sink in. What is there to do but just see this illusion is an illusion?

Just to see clearly what you are describing, but no one is doing the seeing.
I don't understand this.
You say, "no one is doing the seeing."
What do you mean by "seeing"? I cannot seem to find where I've used that term.
To me, "seeing" means using the senses - the eyes, or imagination - the mind's eye; and "observing" is more encompassing. Unattached observer means to me "a presence that is taking it all in - the whole experience, and not just seeing. The "voyeur".
"Seeing" is certainly happening in the mind, by the mind, but there is also observing the mind happening.
Are we on the same page? :)

When I say 'seeing', I'm referring to direct experience, so coming into contact with what is tangible to the senses; and as a result, 'seeing' that there is no separate self in direct experience, that the word/label 'I' can only be found in the content of though, which, as we've explored, has no basis in what is real i.e. tangible to the senses.

I would like to go through some terms that we are using:
By "control"... what do you mean?
I take it to mean "the power to influence something or someone" and "voluntary action".

And then (from this forum):"In the context of Liberation Unleashed, liberation refers to the clear, unambiguous and direct realisation of the absence of a separate self."
So, "liberation" doesn't have to do anything with Truth-realization (as coined by Jed McKenna) or realization of No-self/Anata?

Yes, that definition of control is fine. And yes, it's about certain beliefs, fetters, or perceptual filters that fall away which reveals how things have always been. To call it a realization feels like there is a 'you' that is gaining an insight or experience which is not the case. But these are all pointing to the same thing. No need to get caught up in semantics or definitions. DE IS THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS. THOUGHTS/CONCEPTS ARE USELESS IN ACTUALLY UNDERSTANDING ALL THIS, b/c as we've seen with the imaginary spoon, everything the mind conjures up in thought does not have any basis in reality.

It is such a difficulty for me to engage in any kind of inquiry when I am in that overwhelming state. It is a mixture of sadness, anger, regret, anxiety, etc. All overwhelming, since it is stretching out throughout my whole being, including the surroundings, people, past, future and present, me, parts of me, the observer, desires, fears ... All gets entangled and it just loops and loops and loops in and out in and out... The best thing that I can do is to do nothing and wait for it to pass.
I liken it to diving... When those periods arise, I know that Self is diving down through the caves and the mud and muck of ego, looking for clues, doors, and keys. Then, when it collects all the nasty things, it goes back to the surface and sorts it out... which I am doing now.
Thank you for your patience. I believe you know how it is. Must have been a tough ride for you as well.

Yes, quite difficult indeed. Those states/feelings are commonplace on this path. You are not alone. I went through harsh week long periods of intense emotions of the same sort. Completely overwhelmed and off-kilter. As you said, 'you' can't do anything, these are arising and passing to and from no one. The more you fight, try to understand and manage, the more you suffer.

Surrender, feel it fully, embrace it, embrace the non-embracing of it. Notice the tendency to jump up into the mind and create painful stories and return to direct experience of the body/feelings/sensations.

Congratulations for crashing through the Gate, by the way. I would love to ask you some questions about the "other side" sometime, if that's ok with "you"... :D

Thank you, let's talk more after we're through here :) I try and give you glimpses of 'the other side' when I think it'll help manage expectations or normalize certain aspects of it.

Gunnar

Gunnar,

Try and look back at that moment or transition where you knew the flavor of your emotional/mental experience was in the phase of emergence. Did 'you' make that transition happen, or did you just start to notice 'hey, things are becoming lighter internally'?

I didn't make it happen. It just occurred when I came home from work. Things started settling down. I reminded myself (haha) what my objective is, and proceeded to write a response to you.

Who is doing the allowing? How can that be if there is no one?

Allowing seems to be done by the mind in a "if/then" sequence. "If pain, then avoid/if pleasure, then repeat". Directives from the body to avert pain and increase pleasure. But there is no I there doing it. "I" is being perceived as this bundle of thoughts. Like a bird's nest, or an onion.

The "I" is becoming blurry ... I didn't experience this before...

Go into direct experience of this again and write more about this. Don't try to conceptually understand it or engage with questions about it - that's going back up into the world of thought. Just describe your direct experience of it to me as best you can.

Unlike before, where there was an understanding that an "I" (however vague it was) was producing the thoughts, this time I saw how it dissolved upon looking at it with full attention in the search of the source of thoughts. I just saw the bundle of thoughts emerging from ... well... nothing.
That reminds me of an exercise I did a long time ago. When asking "where do thoughts come from?" there is an actual silence and nothingness occurring. Poof! Out of nothing. No "I" there.
I still identify myself with thinking and feeling, but less so. Especially when I put attention on it.

The perception and the self that has the perception are kinda same. I can't separate them. They arise within the same awareness - self and perception of sensations.

I don't know what more to tell you about this, but this:
The perception of I and the perception of sensations arise within the same awareness. They are both just perceptions. Perception happens. It just occurs.

-----------

Can it be known how tall the body is?
Does the body have a weight or volume?
In the actual experience does the body have a shape or a form?

- Not really ... It is difficult to measure how tall it is. But if I would know the exact dimensions of the chair on which my hamstrings and buttocks are, I could guess it.
- Yes, it has a weight and it has volume.
- Yes, it has a form, however, it is vague and it depends on how attention is distributed.

Is there a boundary between the body and the clothing?
Is there a boundary between the body and the chair?

Yes, in both cases.

Is there an inside or an outside?
If there is an inside - the inside of what exactly?
If there is an outside - the outside of what exactly?

- There is certainly an inside and outside.
- The inside of the body, of the head.
- The outside of the body, of the head.

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to?

A funny realization occurred here... the word refers to the limbs and torso, but not the head (haha). Like, the whole body is a country, the neck is kind of a no man's land, and the head is a sovereign part of it, influencing the body and being influenced by it.

What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

The experience is a mixture of thoughts and sensations. There are thoughts saying "this is me. This is my body." Some tingling sensations here and there.

Were you able to find and feel "insert name" in a direct way like the other parts of your body?
Where is it?
What did you find? Something? Anything? Nothing?
What sensations did you feel in your body that identified "insert name” (If any).

Not really. I've sensed a funnel-like feeling in the middle of my head, and at the end of it the image/sensation "I".
I've felt a light sensation in the head that identified Justin.

No need to get caught up in semantics or definitions. DE IS THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS. THOUGHTS/CONCEPTS ARE USELESS IN ACTUALLY UNDERSTANDING ALL THIS.

I understand this. All I wanted is some reference points. What I was trying to do is to empty my cup and engage in a beginner's mind. My thought processes have hardened over the years with different definitions and pointers, so I am trying to sort them out.

Justin

Justin,

I didn't make it happen. It just occurred when I came home from work. Things started settling down. I reminded myself (haha) what my objective is, and proceeded to write a response to you.

Nice, ya. Now look back at that moment "I reminded myself what my objective is..." Where/what/who was the 'I' that reminded itself. What was that experience really like? That might be a bit vague at this point, so let's try it fresh. Right now, remind 'yourself' of things 'you' plan on doing later today/tonight/this week. Where does this thought comes from? Look for that 'I' that comes with the thought. Are 'you' reminding 'yourself', or is reminding reminding itself? Is an 'I' required for a reminder to occur?

Allowing seems to be done by the mind in a "if/then" sequence. "If pain, then avoid/if pleasure, then repeat". Directives from the body to avert pain and increase pleasure. But there is no I there doing it. "I" is being perceived as this bundle of thoughts. Like a bird's nest, or an onion.

lovely.... lovely. See this at play throughout the day. Is anything excluded from this process?

Unlike before, where there was an understanding that an "I" (however vague it was) was producing the thoughts, this time I saw how it dissolved upon looking at it with full attention in the search of the source of thoughts. I just saw the bundle of thoughts emerging from ... well... nothing.
That reminds me of an exercise I did a long time ago. When asking "where do thoughts come from?" there is an actual silence and nothingness occurring. Poof! Out of nothing. No "I" there.
I still identify myself with thinking and feeling, but less so. Especially when I put attention on it.

Lovely.... go back to this space a few times a day. If you meditate each day (not necessary) you can explore it more there, too.

The perception and the self that has the perception are kinda same. I can't separate them. They arise within the same awareness - self and perception of sensations.
I don't know what more to tell you about this, but this:
The perception of I and the perception of sensations arise within the same awareness. They are both just perceptions. Perception happens. It just occurs.

Lovely... that's my word for today....

- Not really ... It is difficult to measure how tall it is. But if I would know the exact dimensions of the chair on which my hamstrings and buttocks are, I could guess it.
- Yes, it has a weight and it has volume.
- Yes, it has a form, however, it is vague and it depends on how attention is distributed.

Is there a boundary between the body and the clothing?
Is there a boundary between the body and the chair?
Yes, in both cases.

Is there height, weight, volume, boundary, or 'form' in direct experience, if you don't refer to thought? So you might get thoughts like, "ya, from my hamstrings to my buttocks, it's probably 2 ft.." Or "I feel a weightiness in my torso".. but now look at the sensations that those thoughts are referring to and let go of that thought. In the sensations (DE) alone, is there anything indicating weight or height? Notice the subtle thoughts creeping in saying 'but!' and 'well yes! because...'

What did you find? Something? Anything? Nothing?
What sensations did you feel in your body that identified "insert name” (If any).

Not really. I've sensed a funnel-like feeling in the middle of my head, and at the end of it the image/sensation "I".
I've felt a light sensation in the head that identified Justin.

Great. Please keep exploring this funnel-like feeling in the middle of your head, and at the end of it the image/sensation 'I'. This light sensation in the head that identified Justin. Go there and look - what is this? is this me? Like is it really me? What am I if I'm not this?

I understand this. All I wanted is some reference points. What I was trying to do is to empty my cup and engage in a beginner's mind. My thought processes have hardened over the years with different definitions and pointers, so I am trying to sort them out.

I understand, a great intention! Empty your cup... and leave it empty ;)

Gunnar

Nice, ya. Now look back at that moment "I reminded myself what my objective is..." Where/what/who was the 'I' that reminded itself. What was that experience really like?

Well, when I wrote "I reminded myself", I described the DE of the thought process I've had when writing the last post. I immediately saw how silly that is. What actually happened is that a reminder just popped up.

Right now, remind 'yourself' of things 'you' plan on doing later today/tonight/this week. Where does this thought comes from? Look for that 'I' that comes with the thought. Are 'you' reminding 'yourself', or is reminding reminding itself? Is an 'I' required for a reminder to occur?

There is still this vague sense that I am doing it, but less so. A reminder pops up about the non-existence of an actual self within those thoughts that is producing or having those thoughts. It seems that no "I" is required for it to occur. "I" is just a byproduct of conditioning. Very crucial in social engagement, but not really there.
There never was a self there, right? To me it seems that since we were born there just has been this string of cause/effect thought-chain imposed by the environment (or other beings) onto the body, and furthermore onto the mind. An "if/then" sequence.

This morning, when waking up from sleep was about to occur, not even a brief moment could be caught where there were no thoughts, because moments before there was a very vivid dream playing out, and the thinking and sense of self just transitioned into waking life, thinking about that dream, ascribing certain emotions to past emotions, associating certain thoughts with other similar thoughts. Organizing, scheduling, pondering, ruminating... So it must be day in and day out for everyone, more or less. One thought kicks another thought kicks another thought and so on. From the moment of so called birth, throughout life, to this very moment... The mind just minding its business...
Is this constant thought train what your mind calls "self-ing"?

Is there height, weight, volume, boundary, or 'form' in direct experience, if you don't refer to thought?

The question about height is arbitrary and can only be answered with the pre-existing knowledge of what height actually is. In other words, to know the height of the body, one must engage in rational thinking, and translate DE into measurements, for which the mind is required to do that process.

There is the sense of pressure against some parts of the body, that is labelled "weight", and there is this intuitive knowledge of "I end there" (if I would put it in words) to which I don't have to refer to thought to feel that there is a boundary.

No specific form can be found unless the question "Is there a form to the body?" is asked - attention/mind goes then to various parts like a spotlight and checks things out to answer the question. Awareness, like water, takes shape of whatever attention is put on. There arises "volume" as well.

Please keep exploring this funnel-like feeling in the middle of your head, and at the end of it the image/sensation 'I'. This light sensation in the head that identified Justin. Go there and look - what is this? is this me? Like is it really me? What am I if I'm not this?

It is the part that is the "voice" of Justin, the frontman.
Justin is a composite of many smaller Justins. Like a mansion with intertwined and interconnected rooms - every room is a smaller part of the whole, and the master of the mansion is the voice. Sometimes the voices change, depending on the state of consciousness.

Reminds me of the pilot episode of Gravity Falls (*spoiler alert*) ... There were these gnomes, each an individual on its own, and later in the episode, they would come together Power rangers style and become this giant. They appeared as one unit. Something similar happens here as well.

The image/sensation is illusion, of course. I am sorry if I didn't make it clear.
The image/sensation appears, but I am not fooled by it anymore. There is knowledge about it not being me.

I do not know what I am if I am not I... Am I Consciousness? Only that is left.
Is my mind running in circles here? Chasing its tail again?
Why is my mind foggy?

Just a heads up, Gunnar... I won't be able to reply on Saturday (perhaps Sunday as well) due to travelling. I just wanted to inform you on time.

Justin

Justin,

There is still this vague sense that I am doing it, but less so. A reminder pops up about the non-existence of an actual self within those thoughts that is producing or having those thoughts. It seems that no "I" is required for it to occur. "I" is just a byproduct of conditioning. Very crucial in social engagement, but not really there.

That vague sense is okay, let it be there. And keep looking at it. See its substance. Usually just a subtle mix of sensations (in the head) and subtle thoughts (claiming location/ownership).

In the seeing, there is only the seen; in hearing, only the heard, in cognizing, only the cognized... No 'I' required. Just conditioning.. not really there.. only a word in the thought world.. Can you find any kind of entity or self separate from any experience, or is there just experience?

So it must be day in and day out for everyone, more or less. One thought kicks another thought kicks another thought and so on. From the moment of so called birth, throughout life, to this very moment... The mind just minding its business...
Is this constant thought train what your mind calls "self-ing"?

Yes, the constant narrative in the mind relating every experience back to the context of 'I' or 'me'. The cosmic joke... No 'I' or 'me' has ever been seen or found. It's been assumed to have been there because of conditioning and human proclivity. Like how we believed Santa was real because people told us about him, we saw gifts under the tree with 'santa' on it, we saw him on a television screen.. But hmm.... how come I've never seen him in person myself?? Time goes on, we learn of other mythical people/ideas/creatures, we start connecting dots, asking more questions. As we mature/grow, we wake up the illusions and distortions of reality. And at some point, it leads us here to the core of it all - the self.

There is the sense of pressure against some parts of the body, that is labelled "weight", and there is this intuitive knowledge of "I end there" (if I would put it in words) to which I don't have to refer to thought to feel that there is a boundary.

Really tune into what that experience is of "I end there". What is this intuitive knowledge made of and how is it experienced. I sense it's just a subtle thought, maybe a quieter internal auditory sound or a vague mental image. But you tell me. Then look back to the pure sensation and inquire: "Can I find a boundary without referring to thought?" Go deep into the sensations and let go of any referencing or analyzing. No separation. Just the sensation. Let it speak to you. Let it engulf you.

Then do this with sound. Close your eyes, find a sound, and try to find its location in DE. Try to find the boundary/border between 'you' and sound.

Now look at an object further away in the room and try to find the space between the object and 'you'. Then do this with an object much closer in the room and do the same. How is distanced discerned. Look for the voice / mechanism / subtle thoughts that are telling you about distance/space. Does the direct experience of sight inherently communicate distance/boundary/location?

Now sit down comfortably without moving and stare directly at a specific point of an object in front of you. Do this for ten minutes with just one object. Try to be still and not move your gaze. See how the visual field begins to morph and distort. Ideas of distance and location might begin to shift with this distortion. Sometimes you won't even be thinking of location or distance - it will just be this simple engrossment in the visual field. Stay attuned to what is DE of sight and what is a thought overlay?

Now close your eyes, go back into the body, and feel sensations. In the same way, notice how distance/location is cognized or discerned. Attend to these questions from the exercise again. Die into the sensation. Watch thoughts trying to resurrect 'you' by creating a subject/object orientation, by saying "i'm over here, and that sensation is down/over there", by creating boundaries.

Can it be known how tall the body is?
Does the body have a weight or volume?
In the actual experience does the body have a shape or a form?

Is there a boundary between the body and the clothing?
Is there a boundary between the body and the chair?

Is there an inside or an outside?
If there is an inside - the inside of what exactly?
If there is an outside - the outside of what exactly?

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to?
What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

----------

It is the part that is the "voice" of Justin, the frontman.
Justin is a composite of many smaller Justins. Like a mansion with intertwined and interconnected rooms - every room is a smaller part of the whole, and the master of the mansion is the voice. Sometimes the voices change, depending on the state of consciousness.

I like the analogy. Keep parsing out, checking every corner, see every little justin - the frustrated Justin, the happy hopeful justin, the suffering justin who doesn't like himself/his life, the confused justin, the annoyed/edgy justin, the spiritual seeker justin.. They all come through the master, the voice in the head. Are 'you' that voice (the master)? Are 'you' those thought worlds of little justins?

I do not know what I am if I am not I... Am I Consciousness? Only that is left.
Is my mind running in circles here? Chasing its tail again?
Why is my mind foggy?

This process is about seeing what you are not, rather than finding what you are. The mind/ego/self is scared of actually letting go into nothingness. It's like "Okay, 'I' don't exist, but surely I have to exist, right?" "You're saying I'm not this, but surely I'm that, right?" THERE IS NO 'YOU' TO BE ANYTHING! There is just experience. Just seeing, just hearing, just feeling, just cognizing, just consciousness consciousness-ing. Just dog dog-ing. Just bird bird-ing. Just tree tree-ing.

It's just the mind latching onto another part of transitory, insubstantial experience (consciousness in this instance) to create an identity - there is a deep fear that if 'I' completely let go, I will be utterly powerless, at the mercy of life. Well..... 'you' are utterly powerless, and at the mercy of life.

I think of consciousness as often the next illusory stop on the train after the illusion of a separate self falls away. But it's not the final destination / reality. So don't hold this idea that consciousness must be what 'I' am. If it feels like it, cool, explore it, hold it up to clear seeing. But seeing through the separate self is the crucial linch-pin at this point.

I don't think you're running in circles. Mind fog is normal. Seeing is happening wonderfully.

Thanks for the heads up on schedule, safe travels :)
Blessings,
G

Hey Gunnar,

Can you find any kind of entity or self separate from any experience, or is there just experience?

Just a space of awareness where experience happens. There is just experiencing.

"Can I find a boundary without referring to thought?"

As I've mentioned, I don't have to refer to thought to feel that there is a boundary. There is this non-verbal information about finiteness that can't be described with words.

Does the direct experience of sight inherently communicate distance/boundary/location?

Yes, it does.

Stay attuned to what is DE of sight and what is a thought overlay?

The thought overlay was "I don't get it".

Are 'you' that voice (the master)? Are 'you' those thought worlds of little justins?

Yes, I am the voice, the navigator. Also I am the little justins, and simultaneously I am not.

Can it be known how tall the body is?
Does the body have a weight or volume?
In the actual experience does the body have a shape or a form?

Is there a boundary between the body and the clothing?
Is there a boundary between the body and the chair?

Is there an inside or an outside?
If there is an inside - the inside of what exactly?
If there is an outside - the outside of what exactly?

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to?
What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

The answers to these questions remain same. :(

I am sorry, Gunnar, but I am more confused.

Justin,

As I've mentioned, I don't have to refer to thought to feel that there is a boundary. There is this non-verbal information about finiteness that can't be described with words.

We've talked about how thought takes the form of either internal sound or mental images. You say it's non-verbal, could it be mental images of the body and it's supposed finiteness/boundary? Look again at this 'non-verbal information' and what it's really made of.

As I mentioned in the beginning, I don't recommend you trailing off into non-LU content, teachers, videos, though I may offer some specifically for you at times. Here is a guided meditation on experiencing boundaries.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajhflO8wAuQ

I am sorry, Gunnar, but I am more confused.

That's okay. This stuff is not so intuitive and takes some time to feel out. Where do you feel the confusion in the body? Is it okay to be human experiencing confusion right now? Try dropping the story about the confusion and even the label 'confusion' itself, then there is just sensation. Sit with the sensation and watch the mind spring up into re-action, narrating, and story-telling. Keep returning to the bare sensation of this experience.

Dive into the mystery. We may have conceptual ideas/understandings, but they don't hold up to the truth of direct experience. Go there. Trust it. Rest in the unknowing, the mystery, the unfathomable - which is not some esoteric place or state - it's literally just this experience right now as it is. There is no way to solve confusion. The only way is to dis-solve confusion via returning to what is, the freshness of this moment in the senses, seeing thoughts as just thoughts.

Bend with me here... If the world of thought and its content is an illusion (like we learned in the imaginary spoon exercise) and then it creates the question or search of what is true, isn't the question, the pursuit, the answer, the seeking, all founded in the illusion from the start? Taking them seriously as though they may actually be pointing to something is trying to find a 'true answer' based on a question created in a 'false reality'. Do you see the conundrum here? Could we scrap the whole buy-in to the illusory thought world, its questions, its confusions, its doubts, its notions of truth, and go straight to direct experience and let it speak for itself, without labels or conceptual understanding?

-------

And, this point about boundaries we're discussing is not necessary for this initial gate crashing. Let's bring it back to the basics and see what's fresh:

There is no you as a separate entity managing and controlling life. There is no separate self that is thinking, doing, experiencing, feeling, perceiving, witnessing life. What is your immediate reaction to this statement?

When you say/think "I", what does that refer to in direct experience? Please describe in detail – does it have a shape? A size? A quality?"

Blessings,
Gunnar

Do some free-write so we can see where we stand. Focus on seeing, on looking at what is. Take something in your life that’s happening now, like sitting there, reading this, scratching an itch on your face. Get up and walk into another room, get a drink, take a sip, do a small chore, walk back. How is all this happening? Is a self needed for any of this? Write anything that comes up.

G

Hello there,

I guess I get it now, Gunnar. :)

You say it's non-verbal, could it be mental images of the body and it's supposed finiteness/boundary?

There are images there, and when I focus just on DE only sensation is left.
Boundary is just a conceptualization that comes into play retroactively.
The mind truly rushes in to label the sensation, saying "contact point... boundary... body... floor".

Where do you feel the confusion in the body?

It is mostly in the head.

Is it okay to be human experiencing confusion right now?

As it is for now, it is completely okay. Even "not okay" is okay.

If the world of thought and its content is an illusion (like we learned in the imaginary spoon exercise) and then it creates the question or search of what is true, isn't the question, the pursuit, the answer, the seeking, all founded in the illusion from the start?

I understand this fully.
Illusory entities in an illusory world.
I see the conundrum and I am amazed that it works so flawless.

Could we scrap the whole buy-in to the illusory thought world, its questions, its confusions, its doubts, its notions of truth, and go straight to direct experience and let it speak for itself, without labels or conceptual understanding?

Sure. I am finally getting the gist of DE and this process here.

There is no you as a separate entity managing and controlling life. There is no separate self that is thinking, doing, experiencing, feeling, perceiving, witnessing life. What is your immediate reaction to this statement?

At this moment, my reaction to this statement is one of indifference. Like, duh, it's obvious.
But there are times when the ego shrieks out of denial.

When you say/think "I", what does that refer to in direct experience? Please describe in detail – does it have a shape? A size? A quality?"

In DE it refers to a thought. Without the thought arising, the "I" remains unperceived, unexperienced. Whether if it is a shape, or has a size or quality is just thoughts conceptualizing it. "Shape", "size", "quality" ... all just concepts, just thoughts rushing in to fill the vacancy that the question leave behind.
I see it to be a very neat trick of the mind to claim ownership over something so vague and transitory.

Take something in your life that’s happening now, like sitting there, reading this, scratching an itch on your face. Get up and walk into another room, get a drink, take a sip, do a small chore, walk back. How is all this happening?

I don't know.
I would guess that it happens on a moment-to-moment basis, in which each small event triggers the next. It is experienced as it happens, and thoughts retroactively conceptualize every minute detail of it to the point of "I am doing this".

Is a self needed for any of this?

Well ... tricky...
The self isn't needed for it, unless we think of it as a tool or space where calculations for the future happen: "To brew tea, I need to boil water." Then it is kinda necessary. Aspirations. Obligations. Conceptualizations. That kind of thing.
If no human would have a self, we'd be like animals. But in a good sense. Unity/hive mind sense. I would look at you and I would immediately know for certain that you and I are the same.
But I don't know.
If we'd remove the self entirely, could we rely on senses alone? Sure, for boiling water, walking, or speaking, that would go (as they are already learned), but when acquiring a new skill or to ponder about whether to decide to eat chocolate or strawberries, one would need some sort of self.
Otherwise, the self isn't needed. We can observe how nature works perfectly well without one, so yeah ...
The self just seems to serve as a reference point to realize that there is no self.
But, truly, I do not know.

Thanks for the link, it helped me a bit.
I was going through some nasty layers and intense emotional turmoil these days due to this process. At the moment, all seems calm and clear .. :D

Thank you!

J

Justin,

I guess I get it now, Gunnar. :)

Cool! Way to stick with it. And let's be clear. This is not a matter of guessing, assuming, wondering, settling for, deductive reasoning, etc. This is extremely clear and direct. There is no separate self anywhere in existence, anywhere in direct experience. I don't have access to something you don't. Same reality. Right here. Keep looking until it becomes so obviously clear and unavoidable that it could be no other way.

There are images there, and when I focus just on DE only sensation is left.
Boundary is just a conceptualization that comes into play retroactively.
The mind truly rushes in to label the sensation, saying "contact point... boundary... body... floor".

!!!

Where do you feel the confusion in the body?
It is mostly in the head.
Is it okay to be human experiencing confusion right now?
As it is for now, it is completely okay. Even "not okay" is okay.

Lovely. Confusion just being confusion, Joy just being joy. It's all the same - just a mixture of sensations and thoughts. One is not better than the other. Okay is just as okay as not okay. You don't need any state or experience for this, Justin. Clear, direct seeing is always knocking on the door and the truth is always readily apparent - no one is confused. no one is here. no one is in control. The 'I' and 'me' in the thought world point to nothing.. There's just this experience.

I understand this fully.
Illusory entities in an illusory world.
I see the conundrum and I am amazed that it works so flawless.

Yes, no guessing! B/c it is seen. Just as you look and see the table, the laptop, the chair. You KNOW it's there b/c you see it. That simple. You know that the content of the thought world is not there because you cannot see it / experience it / point to it. Clean cut.

At this moment, my reaction to this statement is one of indifference. Like, duh, it's obvious.
But there are times when the ego shrieks out of denial.

Cool, JUST ANOTHER THOUGHT! That simple. See it for what it is. No need for a 'but' as if there is a problem with it or if it's somehow 'getting in the way' of this process. The belief that it is may be. But not the thought itself. Everything belongs.

The self isn't needed for it, unless we think of it as a tool or space where calculations for the future happen: "To brew tea, I need to boil water." Then it is kinda necessary. Aspirations. Obligations. Conceptualizations. That kind of thing.

What about this: "To brew tea, water needs to be boiled."

Try this exercise yourself now: As you sit there, bring up the thought: 'to get a sip of water, I must walk over to the kitchen / fridge' Now do this with that thought in mind.

Then come back to sitting and try this on: 'to get a sip of water, walking to the fridge/kitchen must happen' Now do this with that thought in mind.

Which is more true, accurate? How does this feel? what do you notice? Is a self really needed here?

Then it (a self) is kinda necessary. Aspirations. Obligations. Conceptualizations. That kind of thing.

You may be confusing thoughts, intentions, aspirations, obligations, and conceptualizations for proof that a self exists or of how it functions. But a self already doesn't exist, and thoughts, aspirations, obligations, conceptualizations still happen. We don't want to get rid of these. We are simply cutting through the illusion that these somehow culminate in the existence of a separate self. They are all happening without one already. Thoughts are okay. Even conventionally using 'i' and 'me' is fine when we know that they are not pointing to anything real. Does this make sense?

I was going through some nasty layers and intense emotional turmoil these days due to this process. At the moment, all seems calm and clear .. :D

Yes, good and normal. And best to see that all these emotions and turmoil is not happening TO anyone. Feelings and thoughts just arising. Now calm and clear is the experience, the state of being, for no one. Can you find the one who is calm and clear?

Blessings,
Gunnar

The self isn't needed for it, unless we think of it as a tool or space where calculations for the future happen: "To brew tea, I need to boil water." Then it is kinda necessary. Aspirations. Obligations. Conceptualizations. That kind of thing.
What about this: "To brew tea, water needs to be boiled."

Try this exercise yourself now: As you sit there, bring up the thought: 'to get a sip of water, I must walk over to the kitchen / fridge' Now do this with that thought in mind.

Then come back to sitting and try this on: 'to get a sip of water, walking to the fridge/kitchen must happen' Now do this with that thought in mind.

Which is more true, accurate? How does this feel? what do you notice? Is a self really needed here?

Here's another exercise for you that came to mind regarding this matter:

What kind of ice cream would you choose right now: Vanilla, Chocolate, Strawberry, or a mix?

Now look in direct experience: Where was that decision made? Was a 'self' or 'I' needed to make it? Or did was the decision just decided?

Just like that decision, the same goes for aspirations, intentions, fulfilling obligations. Aspirations are just aspired. Intentions just intended. Obligations just fulfilled. All by no one. We can't find where these energies arise from, how they are determined, or by whom they originate.

Sorry for the three separate messages :)

Gunnar

Hey, Gunnar,
No need to be sorry for the separate messages.

And let's be clear. This is not a matter of guessing, assuming, wondering, settling for, deductive reasoning, etc. This is extremely clear and direct.

OK. :)

Try this exercise yourself now: As you sit there, bring up the thought: 'to get a sip of water, I must walk over to the kitchen / fridge' Now do this with that thought in mind.

Then come back to sitting and try this on: 'to get a sip of water, walking to the fridge/kitchen must happen' Now do this with that thought in mind.

Which is more true, accurate? How does this feel? what do you notice? Is a self really needed here?

I was perplexed, but not surprised that no self is needed there. Astounding illusion! Feels like autopilot.
I have noticed that there is "no one home"... at that moment I laughed out loud. :D
A bit spooky, hehe ... The world of thoughts seems so occupied and busy, yet strangely no one is there.

You may be confusing thoughts, intentions, aspirations, obligations, and conceptualizations for proof that a self exists or of how it functions. But a self already doesn't exist, and thoughts, aspirations, obligations, conceptualizations still happen. We don't want to get rid of these. We are simply cutting through the illusion that these somehow culminate in the existence of a separate self. They are all happening without one already. Thoughts are okay. Even conventionally using 'i' and 'me' is fine when we know that they are not pointing to anything real. Does this make sense?

Yes, absolutely. No doubt.

Can you find the one who is calm and clear?

Nope, just the experience of what is called calmness and clarity.
When I look for someone that is experiencing it, "I" appears as a shadow for a moment before disappearing again. And after that all that is left is ______. That empty feeling that can't be described.

Here's another exercise for you that came to mind regarding this matter:

What kind of ice cream would you choose right now: Vanilla, Chocolate, Strawberry, or a mix?

Easy-peasy, chocolate. (:

Now look in direct experience: Where was that decision made? Was a 'self' or 'I' needed to make it? Or did was the decision just decided?

Somewhere in the middle of the head.
No, it just popped up. The decision was made immediately when the question was asked. Autopilot-style. "I" had no business there. lol
Just joking happening... No self was there to make the decision, just deciding happened.

Gratefully,
J