The Gate

Notice that with beliefs being shed, there is less doing and less happening.

Yes, less reactivity to what’s there and a sense of not needing to interfere with or defend anything (including “myself”) … and, in that space, intuitive awareness just operates and makes decisions naturally. I've experienced that.

As suffering lessens, nothing increases.

Not sure what you mean by nothing. Do you mean 'nothing being a big deal' increases?... or nothing increases as in nothing exacerbates?... or is it something else?

How much you try is how much you suffer. How much you seek to know is how much you suffer.

Agreed. I think 'the difficulty in just letting the trying go' lies with the extent to which the trying manifests reflexively and unconsciously. 'How refractory that reactive trying is' indexes to how ingrained the conditioning is. This would then imply some sort of failure rate as I don’t imagine “turning away” from that conditioning realizes instantly or perfectly. Per what I’ve described in my own experience, it tends to take many “practice repetitions” across different conditions to fully bake in… plus I’d imagine there’d be a certain modularity to it. Not trying with this issue may prove more refractory than not trying with another issue, as the conditioning with each varies. (Note: "turning away" may not be the best metaphor here)

Is there a quicker way to do this or is this overconstructed?

I’d add, one’s sense of self seems rooted in thoughts being attached to other thoughts, the thoughts being that central thing that solidifies the sense of separateness from everything. So, in effect it would be “turning away” from the thoughts that "compel" you to try?

When you taste food, do you try to do anything about the taste? When you listen to music, do you try to do anything about the sounds?

No.

When you feel unpleasant emotions, what more is there to do than to just feel them?

I agree. Sometimes, though, there’s a sense of needing some space to do so, a sense of needing to pause, to feel them more manageably, especially if they're intense and the context is just too social to let them out. You get better at it the more you practice it. There's a neurodivergent element here that relates to the phenomenon of melting down or shutting down.

Feeling them isn't even a thing you can do, the emotions are already there, with nothing called "feeling" or a "feeler" in experience.

Yes, it’s all automatic

Notice how you feel them less when you can distract yourself by and try to get away from them? So what's left to do when they arise?

Well, the advice here would be to, head-on, don’t interfere with them

I wouldn't say so. 'I' is just a byproduct.

I see that. Those operations construct a sense of self.

Why do you need to drop it? Why do you NEED to do anything?

I’d need to just let it be... not interfere.

Woke up and I think I got the picture, though it's a bit preliminary.

If I have unpleasant sensations, they're just unpleasant sensations. There's no self there to feel them. It doesn't matter what the sensations are. They are what they are and it just is. They happen of their own accord, whether they're pleasant, unpleasant, or in-between.

The contents of thoughts, especially egoic ones, are derivate impressions (from sensations and potentially other thoughts) and, as such, are indirect, i.e., not DE, and hence are just "imaginations".

Non-egoic thoughts can be useful but they are just thoughts. They're removed. They can certainly function as "conceptual advisories", e.g., I thought of a precept for a new theory. They're still though just derivate impressions and thus outside DE.

The mere incidence of thought, before any availing of its content, would also be a constituent of DE? That was a sensation, that was a thought, etc.?

I feel freakishly unburdened.

I actually felt like shit when I woke up 😆, but I know it had nothing to do with a "me".. and I felt that clearly.

Egoic thoughts still echo, but they're very wispy and dissolve quickly. No harm, no foul.

Not sure what you mean by nothing. Do you mean 'nothing being a big deal' increases?... or nothing increases as in nothing exacerbates?... or is it something else?

Nothing increases as in there's nothing that increases. No extra effort, trying, knowledge, whatever is needed for suffering to reduce.

I’d need to just let it be... not interfere.

Why do you need to not interfere?

Well, the advice here would be to, head-on, don’t interfere with them

But "don't interfere" isn't something you can do. You can only interfere.

The mere incidence of thought, before any availing of its content, would also be a constituent of DE? That was a sensation, that was a thought, etc.?

Don't worry about DE and not DE anymore, this is also an artificial distinction in the end. As in, a distinction made with thought.

How have you been feeling recently?

Watch your thoughts. People are normally too engrossed in their thoughts to realise they're thoughts. Watch your thoughts but don't forget that they're thoughts. Watch everything your thoughts say. They're arbitrary and automatic. The content of your thoughts could be totally different. The words I write are no more "true" or "correct" than the ramblings and theories you write. The imagination/not-imagination distinction is just thought. The true/false distinction is just thought.

Can you write down a true statement?

Thanks for the reply! :) As before, I'm little tied up today but I will get back to you tomorrow. 🙏

Notice that with beliefs being shed, there is less doing and less happening. As suffering lessens, nothing increases. Nothing increases as in there's nothing that increases... No extra effort, trying, knowledge, whatever is needed for suffering to reduce.

Yes, I see that now.

Why do you need to not interfere?

Well, in the sense of just accepting what’s here, i.e., I'm not trying to change, improve, or alter the present-moment experience.

But "don't interfere" isn't something you can do. You can only interfere.

I think we’re talking past each other?

Don't worry about DE and not DE anymore, this is also an artificial distinction in the end. As in, a distinction made with thought.

It’s not yet clear to me that the distinction is artificial.

How have you been feeling recently?

Giddy, re: the experiences described in the 10/23 posts, only to tire out and then get giddy again.

Watch your thoughts. People are normally too engrossed in their thoughts to realize they're thoughts. Watch your thoughts but don't forget that they're thoughts. Watch everything your thoughts say. They're arbitrary and automatic. The content of your thoughts could be totally different. The words I write are no more "true" or "correct" than the ramblings and theories you write. The imagination/not-imagination distinction is just thought. The true/false distinction is just thought.

Acknowledged.

I don’t think I’ve been caught up in my thoughts, re: the last 3 days. As I described earlier, my thoughts have been wispy and unsubstantial. I’m not really believing them

Can you write down a true statement?

Sounds are happening.

Look for the boundaries between the senses. Where does sound end and sight begin? Where does sensation end and thought begin? Are they separate at all in experience?

Look for the boundaries between the senses.

There are none in direct experience. The senses are interwoven. Boundaries between them exist only in the conceptual sense, as labels.

Where does sound end and sight begin?

In direct experience, those senses arise simultaneously within awareness. Distinctions between them, as before, are only conceptual.

Where does sensation end and thought begin?

In direct experience, sensations and thoughts arise simultaneously within awareness. However, when one is focused on thinking, thoughts can come to the foreground over sensations.

Are they separate at all in experience?

No, not in (direct) experience.

In direct experience, sensations and thoughts arise simultaneously within awareness.

Is there any arising found in DE? Is it not just as it is already, always? When you use the word awareness, do you recognise that there's nothing called awareness? Just making sure it's just the language you're using, as a lot of people tend to reify awareness.

I'll copy-paste something from a conversation with someone else that I think could be relevant to you.

Client: It hit me very strongly the other day that whatever is here now is all there is. And there is no "me" here now, nor any past or future or any of that. Only as fleeting thoughts and I don't even know what a thought is, can't find it or grasp it in any way.
The statement "nothing ever happened" looked so obvious and hit me like a ton of bricks. This near-constant story is a story that isn't pointing to anything real. The continuity and evaluation that shows up there is truly MADE UP. And when it's gone, it's gone. Nothing I can remember ever really happened in a couple ways. One, where is it hiding now? It's only here now, if it is, as vague images or sounds called memories. And two, even "then" (which doesn't exists except as a thought!!!), it wasn't really happening. There was seeing and hearing and feeling and tasting and smelling and story telling. What the story was saying wasn't reflected in "reality", whatever that is. It was the story only and it was gone in a flash.

I may not be expressing this well but it felt so obvious. Some laughter and a lot of head shaking. Since then a lot of old habitual thought has resurfaced but it doesn't feel so real.

I don't want to make this into anything but I guess that would only be a thought if that's how it looks.

Can you even write a true statement?

This is funny after all that I just wrote. No, nothing I could write is true in any real way. Also not a lie. Just thoughts, I guess?


Me: Hahahah, yeah it's really funny when you see that the whole world was really just thoughts built upon thoughts built upon thoughts. There's no context without thought. Thoughts can only point to other thoughts, like a closed loop. Suffering is just a matter of mistaking thoughts for "reality" (which is also a thought, by the way). We began the investigation distinguishing DE/not-DE, true/false, reality/imagination. But do you see how even these categories are created by thought?

Before we can believe a thought to be reality, we have to first believe in the paradigm of reality/imagination. But nothing of the sort can be found. Where does thought end and sight begin? Where is the boundary between sound and sensation? Is there any separation without thought?

Our thoughts are neither true nor false, as those are thoughts. Our thoughts are neither thoughts nor not thoughts, as those are thoughts. Some lean towards nihilism, and conclude that everything is meaningless. But everything is neither meaningless nor meaningful. And there is neither everything nor nothing. And there neither is nor isn't. You see how deep the illusion of separation goes? Even "is/isn't", the basic building block of all concept or language, isn't findable in DE. Then language fails to describe. Because there isn't anything to describe, nor is there not anything to describe.

This was tremendously helpful, Tyler! Thank you! 🙂 I'll get back to you before too long! 👍

Is there any arising found in DE?

No, it all just is – undivided and whole.

Is it not just as it is already, always?

Yes.

When you use the word awareness, do you recognize that there's nothing called awareness? Just making sure it's just the language you're using, as a lot of people tend to reify awareness.

No, there is no such “thing” as awareness. There’s just all of what’s here, all of THIS. There is a concept, however, called awareness.

Client: It hit me very strongly the other day that whatever is here now is all there is. And there is no "me" here now, nor any past or future or any of that. Only as fleeting thoughts and I don't even know what a thought is, can't find it or grasp it in any way.

I can sink into that realization, yes. But does it stay absolutely locked in? Not yet.

The statement “nothing ever happened” looked so obvious and hit me like a ton of bricks.

I can see that, yes, but not with a perpetually perfect “signal”

This near-constant story is a story that isn’t pointing to anything real. The continuity and evaluation that shows up there is truly MADE UP.

Arbitrary, yes. One can, at once, have stories show up and, all the while, know that they are untrue. We’re still only human and don’t realize all this perfectly, all the time.

And when it's gone, it's gone. Nothing I can remember ever really happened in a couple ways. One, where is it hiding now? It's only here now, if it is, as vague images or sounds called memories.

You couldn’t absolutely subscribe to this on a ‘functional reality’ level, but ultimately, yes, all of what remains outside of THIS are thoughts connecting to other thoughts, connecting to other thoughts. You live with this as someone who knows they’re in the Matrix but still plays along to get along because you know you can’t really leave. It’s a functional/ultimate reality combo-space and you’re walking in the “total middle” where things are both true and untrue.

Can you even write a true/untrue statement?

THIS

Suffering is just a matter of mistaking thoughts for "reality" (which is also a thought, by the way). We began the investigation distinguishing DE/not-DE, true/false, reality/imagination. But do you see how even these categories are created by thought?

Thoughts are inherently dualistic and, as such -to borrow from Buddhism- they’re ultimately empty.

Before we can believe a thought to be reality, we have to first believe in the paradigm of reality/imagination.

Yes, another conceptual duality that, ultimately, is empty.

Is there any separation without thought?

No sense of separation without identification with thoughts, no.

Our thoughts are neither true nor false, as those are thoughts. Our thoughts are neither thoughts nor not thoughts, as those are thoughts. Some lean towards nihilism and conclude that everything is meaningless. But everything is neither meaningless nor meaningful. And there is neither everything nor nothing.

Yes, more conceptual (empty) dualities.

And there neither is nor isn't. You see how deep the illusion of separation goes? Even "is/isn't", the basic building block of all concept or language, isn't findable in DE. Then language fails to describe. Because there isn't anything to describe, nor is there not anything to describe.

DE is “raw” and unprocessed. Being able to communicate it in a functional way necessarily involves completely mischaracterizing it.

Hey Chowki, I didn't really feel the need to reply to your last post. Is there anything else you'd like to explore? Would you like LU's set of checkpoint questions so you can get added to the aftercare Facebook group and maybe even start guiding if you're interested?

Do you still have questions? Is there still seeking? Does anything feel not-done?