The Gate

Hi Pablo

That’s it! Keep digging…

Is there a boundary between the body and the chair? At the point where your body contacts the chair, are there two things there, a body and chair, or one, sensation?

No boundaries, just unlocatable, non-continuous sensations.

So are there two sensations – sensation labelled “chair” and sensation labelled “butt” – or just one labelled “butt on chair”?? Check now, don't just answer! That's important

Is it "my" body, or is it just a body?

It goes back and forth for me still. For the most part, it's just a body, but sometimes there's a claiming or ownership of some kind of point of view, which comes from sensations that are around the eyes.

Perfect. Look now—this “ownership” that arises:
Can it be found without a thought saying “mine” or “me”?
What exactly in the sensation around the eyes is claiming anything? Does the sensation speak?
Does the tingling, pressure, or tightness itself say: “I am a point of view”/ "a center"? Does it say "I'm behind the eyes"?
Or does that interpretation arrive after as a layer of thought?
What is observing that center/the observer/the sensations “behind the eyes” and from where?
Focus on something in the room. If you have to draw a line in your seeing ending in the observed object, where exactly would it start? Observe the mental images and what is actually there. Is there an actual distance (line)? What is the distance made of? Have an honest look!

Right now:
If you don’t call it “around the eyes”…
If you don’t call it “mine” or “ownership”…
What exactly is left?
Hold steady right there—report only what is undeniable before the label sticks.

Can the 'body' do things?

I'm not sure if I'm getting the depth of what you're asking, but what I got so far when I explored that question is when the body's touching or grabbing things, all I can say is there are sensations that are felt, and that it takes a string of thoughts to create some kind of body interacting with other objects out there, but in direct experience there's just the unfolding of different appearances and sensations.

Good. You're circling close.
If the word “body” never appears, If there’s no thought saying “grabbing” or “touching”…
What’s actually here?
Don’t answer from memory. Right now. Look.
Is there anything doing?
Is there anything done to?
Or just appearance flashing, no subject, no object, no actor, no acted-upon.
Stay there.
Let go of the storyline.
What’s moving?
What’s being moved?
Point to it. Show it.
Love
Rali

So are there two sensations – sensation labelled “chair” and sensation labelled “butt” – or just one labelled “butt on chair”?? Check now, don't just answer! That's important

I feel like in my experience I would say it just feels like "Contact" if that makes sense, not butt or chair but just that contact.

Can it be found without a thought saying “mine” or “me”?
What exactly in the sensation around the eyes is claiming anything? Does the sensation speak?
Does the tingling, pressure, or tightness itself say: “I am a point of view”/ "a center"? Does it say "I'm behind the eyes"?
Or does that interpretation arrive after as a layer of thought?

Yes, only with thought can there be an interpretation of sensations being owned, or a center, or feeling a sensation IS the point of view.

What is observing that center/the observer/the sensations “behind the eyes” and from where?

I feel like I continue to see that there is nothing that is "observing" the center, there's just sensations and the pure visual field, but it feels like that feeling of subtle observer continues to come back. Is there something I'm not seeing?

Focus on something in the room. If you have to draw a line in your seeing ending in the observed object, where exactly would it start? Observe the mental images and what is actually there. Is there an actual distance (line)? What is the distance made of? Have an honest look!

Absolutely zero distance, the distance is just purely made of thought and tries to create a separation between observer and observed, but even without there being distance, there's still some filtering going on that can divide observer and observed.

Good. You're circling close.
If the word “body” never appears, If there’s no thought saying “grabbing” or “touching”…
What’s actually here?
Don’t answer from memory. Right now. Look.
Is there anything doing?
Is there anything done to?
Or just appearance flashing, no subject, no object, no actor, no acted-upon.
Stay there.
Let go of the storyline.
What’s moving?
What’s being moved?

This is still unclear, I have to look more into this. I just want to say thank you so much for all these amazing questions, I'm having a lot of fun. I really appreciate your guidance, you're amazing!

Love,
Pablo

Hi Pablo

It’s really my pleasure guiding you! I really appreciate your determination and eagerness to look!
My answer can be split in two parts so I would suggest to split the looking into two separates slots of time.

I feel like I continue to see that there is nothing that is "observing" the center, there's just sensations and the pure visual field, but it feels like that feeling of subtle observer continues to come back. Is there something I'm not seeing?

You’re still trying to see “something.”
That “subtle observer” feeling is the last veil. The final thought. It is a thought that’s been repeated so many times without checking it’s validity, so it won’t drop right away. Are you in charge of thoughts (the thinker), can you drop it? Why haven’t you then? Or thoughts are very much self-organised? The more DE is prioritised the more chance there is for thoughts to self-correct. It’s not a problem to fix. It’s a habit of referring back—a reflex to assume that this is being seen by someone.
But is it?
Let’s stop trying to see through that observer.
Instead—look for it. Right now. Not the story. Not the sensation. The actual thing.
You say, “there’s just sensations and the pure visual field.”
Good. Now look closer:
Where is the boundary of the visual field? Where does it begin or end?
Where is the one who knows it? Don't just answer! Look for it!
Does the sensation of “observer” contain a knower?
Can you open that “feeling of observer” like a box and find something inside?
Or is it just another sensation—appearing, passing, gone?
For the next exercise, I’d like to ask you to explore this SENSE of self very-very thoroughly. Not by thinking about it, but by FEELING it. Keep the focus of attention on the sense of self and inquire:

Does the sense of self have a location?
Does the sense of self have a shape or a size?
Does the sense of self say or communicate anything?
If the answer is yes, how does the sense do this exactly?
Does the sense of self have any characteristics or attributes?
What is the sense of self ‘made of’? An image? Sound? Taste? Smell? Sensation? Thought?
What is found?

What discerns it, distinguishes it, filters it out from "not me" ("the experienced"/ "the observed", etc.)?
If and when that sense of "me" arises, what creates and/or notices it?
When there is a sense of "me", and thus "not me" as well, look for what "in here" looks out at what is "out there" (i.e., "not me")?
And having experienced a "me" your whole life: was it because you identified with an aspect of experience (i.e. subtle sensations), or identified as an aspect of experience? Is/was there a difference between identifying with and identifying as something?

What’s moving?
What’s being moved?

This is still unclear, I have to look more into this.

Good. Now stay in that. Do not move to fix it. No thinking. No looking for answers.
Here is an even deeper investigation of the body. Please follow each step, don't leave out any. Take your time. Don't move to the next step until the previous one is clearly seen. Repeat the exercise several times.

Stand in front of a bigger mirror.

(1) First, close the eyes and feel the sensations labelled ‘body’.
(2) Then open the eyes and look into the mirror while still paying attention to the sensations. Is there any connection between the felt sensations and the image in the mirror? Or just thoughts (and/or mental images) suggest that there is?
(3) While still paying attention to the sensations move one hand and observe the movement from the mirror. Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and image of movement in the mirror?
(4) Now do the same movement with the hand, but this time look at the hand directly, not from the mirror. Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and the image ‘of movement’? Or only thoughts suggest it?
(5) Now, pay attention only to the image in the mirror. Does the image by itself suggest in any way that is ‘you’ or ‘your body’? Does the image itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘body’ at all? Or are there only colours and shapes?
(6) Where the mirror ends, some parts of the body (probably legs) cannot be seen. Just by the image in the mirror, is there any ‘knowledge’ that there must be legs, or only thoughts and mental images suggest so?
(7) Now turn away from the mirror and look forward (don’t look directly to any body parts). Is there a ‘body’ anywhere when all thoughts and images are ignored, or are there only sensations?
(8) Start to walk slowly.
Is there a ‘body walking’, or are there only sensations?
Is there actual experience of ‘walking’ at all?
Or just THOUGHTS ABOUT ‘walking’?
Can such a thing as ‘body’ be found OR just THOUGHTS ABOUT a ‘body’?
Can such a thing as ‘walking’ be found?
(9) Are the sensations localized in space, like ‘going through the room’; OR is there only an image that is labelled ‘room’ and appearing sensations without any location?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcOUEQh1FR8

Love
Rali

Are you in charge of thoughts (the thinker), can you drop it? Why haven’t you then? Or thoughts are very much self-organised?

No, definitely not in charge of thoughts. Thoughts think themselves, and when you can see that's the case, then they can self-drop, although I'm sure there's some thoughts that haven't been let go of if the self-view is still intact, but the questions you gave me to explore today I think did some real damage!

Where is the boundary of the visual field? Where does it begin or end?
Where is the one who knows it? Don't just answer! Look for it!
Does the sensation of “observer” contain a knower?
Can you open that “feeling of observer” like a box and find something inside?
Or is it just another sensation—appearing, passing, gone?

Doing this exercise really allowed me to realize a few interesting things. So yes, it was clear that I can't find a boundary of the visual field, can't find where it begins or ends. It felt like the sense of self, through sensations, could kind of "box me in" somehow, but I saw that was purely a thought. What made that happen was I was on the train and I heard a sound through the intercom, and I realized I habitually tried to "know it" from somewhere. So it was like the mind was trying to use a sensation as a reference point to "know" the sound from its own position. It's not perfect, but I can see more how the mind tries to create an image paired with a sensation to create like a face or a head as a reference point to the rest of the "non-me" phenomena. If it's let go of, it's seen as just another sensation, apparing, passing, and gone. And the taste of "in the seen, only the seen" is more obvious now.

Does the sense of self have a location?
Does the sense of self have a shape or a size?
Does the sense of self say or communicate anything?
If the answer is yes, how does the sense do this exactly?
Does the sense of self have any characteristics or attributes?
What is the sense of self ‘made of’? An image? Sound? Taste? Smell? Sensation? Thought?
What is found?

At first, it seemed like the sense of self had a location, size, shape. It seemed like it was creating like a box of sensation around the eyes that it could call "me", but the more I looked, the more that whole process was unfindable. The sense of self doesn't communicate and can't actually claim anything, it's only thought that makes it seem that way. At first, I would say the sense of self is made of particular sensations, but really that was sensations + thought, and without believing in the thought of ownership, I can't say I can find any sense of self. Also, I realized that I was resisting the sensations in my head, which made everything feel more solid. When the need for things to be a certain way is let go of, all of a sudden the feeling of being somehow "stuck in the head" drastically went down, and the same for labels like "being in" or "head", or reference points.

What discerns it, distinguishes it, filters it out from "not me" ("the experienced"/ "the observed", etc.)?
If and when that sense of "me" arises, what creates and/or notices it?
When there is a sense of "me", and thus "not me" as well, look for what "in here" looks out at what is "out there" (i.e., "not me")?
And having experienced a "me" your whole life: was it because you identified with an aspect of experience (i.e. subtle sensations), or identified as an aspect of experience? Is/was there a difference between identifying with and identifying as something?

At first I would say that it seems like the filter operates by creating a shape of sensations or cluster of sensations that can be used as a screen that allows everything behind it to me and everything in front to be not-me, but as I was saying before the more I looked the more I can't find any type of screen or mechanism that can actually filter experience that way. It's really weird. And with your last question there, I would say there's not really a difference, just different layers of subtlety. Before it felt like identifying as a "whole thing", now it's very minute and particular things that easily stand out in my experience as like a selfing is going on. Let me know if this isn't detailed enough and you want me to get more into it.

Is there a ‘body walking’, or are there only sensations?
Is there actual experience of ‘walking’ at all?
Or just THOUGHTS ABOUT ‘walking’?
Can such a thing as ‘body’ be found OR just THOUGHTS ABOUT a ‘body’?
Can such a thing as ‘walking’ be found?
(9) Are the sensations localized in space, like ‘going through the room’; OR is there only an image that is labelled ‘room’ and appearing sensations without any location?

I still have to keep looking into this, but it's becoming a little more clear. Especially with walking. It's becoming more and more obvious that all that can be said about 'walking' is that there are sensations. Can't even talk about the unfolding of appearances because that would be creating a linking that is only available through thought. Only thoughts about these lables like body can be found, really it's just sensations. It's a little tricky when I look in the mirror and see my face but it's becoming more clear that what's linking the appearance and the mirror and sensations are just thoughts. I haven't done a lot of looking in this area though, so I need to work on this more to get more details. Hopefully this helps.

Hi Pablo
Yes, this is helping a lot.
There’s an incredible clarity showing up here:
You’re no longer trying to kill the ego. You’re not chasing “no-self.”
You’re just looking directly, patiently, honestly. And it’s unwinding itself (no you doing it).
Here’s the key to take it deeper now:

The mind was trying to use a sensation as a reference point to ‘know’ the sound from its own position.

Also, I realized that I was resisting the sensations in my head, which made everything feel more solid. When the need for things to be a certain way is let go of, all of a sudden the feeling of being somehow "stuck in the head" drastically went down, and the same for labels like "being in" or "head", or reference points.

Perfect.
That’s the move. That’s what creates the sense of a “me” at the center, every time. So let’s dig into that reflex—like pulling the thread at the center of the illusion.
When that reference point appears again, don’t try to stop it. Just sit in the middle of it.
Then ask:
Does this “reference point” have a location? Can you find it?
Is it solid, or just flickering?
Can it exist without a thought saying, “this is where I am”?

When we try to trace back the origin of a thought (the real source of the idea of a self), it is often believed that it's coming from the head, because the attention automatically goes to the sensation of the head. So have a look throughout the day
What is the head in the actual experience?
A sensation + a mental image of a head (still a thought) + thoughts about a head (e.g. labels, thoughts about the thoughts in my head, a brain, seeing with eyes, hearing with ears, etc - all thought to be in the head), right?

So, can a thought come from a sensation (“head”)?
Can a thought come from a mental image?
Does the mental image suggest in any that it is a ‘head’?
Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘head’?
Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘me’?
Other than thought, can you find anything that suggests the sensation labelled as ‘head’ is a head or a me?

Now here’s the kicker:
What’s wrong with there being no reference point at all?
Let it fall away. And in the next moment, do it again.

I still have to keep looking into this, but it's becoming a little more clear. Especially with walking. It's becoming more and more obvious that all that can be said about 'walking' is that there are sensations.

Try this in motion: walk slowly through a room or outside. Let all sensation and seeing be completely raw.
No “ahead,” no “behind,” no “from here”—only flicker, movement, shifting colours and sensations.
Keep asking:
Where is this being perceived from?
Can I find the one doing the walking?
Or is this simply walking… happening?

We can explore doer-ship and decision making in more detail if you like…
You’re not missing anything. The “subtle observer” is the last residue.
And now it’s starting to be seen.
Let me know what’s here when the need to locate a reference point completely falls away.

Love
Rali

Does this “reference point” have a location? Can you find it?
Is it solid, or just flickering?
Can it exist without a thought saying, “this is where I am”?

Can't seem to find it, more and more I've seen today that when I pay attention to it, the more I see it's flickering, impermanent, almost essenceless. Seeing the thought of "this is where I am" is tricky, but I see how the mind tries to assert itself and some kind of solidity and position by continuing to try to create images of a head, of some continuity with something inside the head knowing experience. It's not perfect, but it feels like moment by moment as I pay attention to this movement of mind, it dissolves and then tries to reify, then I see it and it's let go of and then it tries to solidify, over and over again. I'm noticing there was a lot more fear today, and when it came up, I tried asking myself what is this fear trying to protect, like you said before, and not pushing it away. Nothing has come up yet, not sure if I need to go deeper than just this question.

What is the head in the actual experience?

Just sensations, can't say anything more than that. It's not that I've yet perfectly been able to see through the mind's mechanisms of trying to create this permanent, solid head that I'm seeing out of, but I think I've been able to drop it a little more today.

So, can a thought come from a sensation (“head”)?
Can a thought come from a mental image?
Does the mental image suggest in any that it is a ‘head’?
Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘head’?
Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘me’?
Other than thought, can you find anything that suggests the sensation labelled as ‘head’ is a head or a me?

This isn't yet fully clear, but I'm definitely not able to find anything other than thought that these suggestions can actually create a "head", but I still need to work more on this. It still hasn't dropped yet.

What’s wrong with there being no reference point at all?

Today I was able to see over and over again that I couldn't find a reference point. And each time I did see that, it felt like a tiny weight came off me. And like a little free fall happened each time to I noticed that.

Where is this being perceived from?
Can I find the one doing the walking?
Or is this simply walking… happening?

It definitely is only walking happening. I was able to see the no-doer aspect of experience over a year ago, but I would like to keep exploring this if you feel like I'm stuck somewhere or there might be further exploration needed for me. Open to wherever you want to take me!

Hi Pablo
Yes—exactly. You’re not stuck.
This is momentum.
This is the dissolution, playing out in slow motion.
You're already seeing through it with real honesty:

It dissolves and then tries to reify, then I see it and it's let go of and then it tries to solidify, over and over again.

That is the falling away.
There’s no “final pop.” No finishing line. Just this repetitive self-erasing echo… until the momentum dries up. It didn’t pop into existence and it won’t pop out of existence - it took years to form. It is just thought slowly adjusting the description, giving new meaning. There is no manager of the process. There is no one to oversee ("see it") and take corrective measures and no one to "get stuck". There is no one doing the inquiry. Just patterns. Can you see that :)?
Here is an inetersting video, if you have the time:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCtvAvZtJyE

Let’s press one level deeper into what’s still looping:

The mind continues to try to create images of a head, of some continuity…

So now ask—when the image of a head appears:
Where is that image located?
What is seeing it?
Is the image itself saying, “this is where I am”?
More directly:
Does the image look out?
Seriously—check this.
Can the image see?
Or is there just… seeing… and a floating mental picture trying to hijack it?
Try this:
Close your eyes.
With eyes closed, you will now experience 'blackness'. There may be other things you can find going on, sure. If you are looking at a bright light, there may be a red glow. There may be sparkly bits or cloudy flecks appearing and disappearing - It really doesn't matter about the specifics.
Just to make things simple, whatever you can see with eyes closed, I'm going to refer to it as 'black' or 'blackness' just for simplicity.
1) With eyes closed, can you confirm that what is experienced is 'blackness' as I mentioned?
2) Is there anything else in 'seeing' other than 'blackness'?
3) Can what is seeing/witnessing the blackness be found?
4) Can a pair of eyes, an 'I' / 'me'/'Pablo'/'a person'/'observer' be found that is witnessing the blackness? Or is there just 'blackness' to be found?
What do you find?
Can an INHERENT SEE-ER be found?
Would anything that is suggested as the see-er/observer/experiencer/witness/Pablo, be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?
And if you say ‘I see just blackness’, where is the ‘I’ in the seeing?
Isn’t it just blackness… with no one in it?”

What is this sense of “something being here”?
Don’t analyse.
Look.
What exactly is giving that impression?
Is it a sensation? Image? Thought?
Can you find the thing that says: “There is something here that’s aware, at the center”?
Because if that collapses—and it will—it’s over.
There’s just what IS. Just this. I like this as it is more like a pointing word, like an arrow to what is silently happening right now, and now… (free from conceptual elaborations and the subject–object distinction).

You’ve said it already:

It’s not perfect… but it feels like moment by moment as I pay attention to this movement of mind, it dissolves…

Exactly. Stay there. Just keep watching it try—and fail—to reassert itself.
The fiction is transparent now.
Let me know what happens when you look for the thing that says "there’s something here."
What is actually found?

I'll be away again this weekend and I won't have any reception - going to Kruger National Park for my birthday. I'll be back Sunday evening. Use the time to inquire constantly with all these questions .
If fear appears again stay with it and see:

Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is fear or that it is fearful?
Does the sensation itself know anything about fear?
Can you find anyone/anything in the sensation itself or behind the sensation that is fearful?
Does the label ‘fear’ know anything about fear, or is the word just a bunch of letters?
Is the label ‘fear’ itself fearful?
Can you find anyone/anything in the word itself that is fearful?
See that certain sensations tend to be labelled in certain ways, e.g. the thought label “fear” may be habitually applied to a knot-like sensation in the stomach area. “Anxiety” may be the thought label for trembling hands and nausea, etc. They may vary for different people, so it helps to be aware of what it is for you. Can you give some examples of this from your experience?

Once you’re down to the bare sensation – having taken the thought label off it, the story can hardly go unnoticed. A knot in the stomach is a knot in the stomach, and nothing more – not fear, and not a story about something that brings fear. Notice that even "a knot in the stomach" is a story/a label/a description that is nothing like the DE...
Love
Rali

Rali, WTF.... this is so insane. I can't believe how simple this is, I feel so stupid lol. I was trying the exercise you said about closing your eyes and seeing blackness, and like previous exercise when it comes to seeing, hearing, etc. I can see clearly that I can't find anyone seeing, there's just seeing the blackness. But then all of a sudden, all the thoughts that seemed to suggest a self stood out so obviously compared to the rest of experience that is NOT a thought, and it was just like BOOM.. BOOM.. BOOM.. one thought let go of after another, and it was just so obvious that all those sensations and thoughts that seemed to imply a head, a face, someone seeing, etc. were just thoughts with nothing at all behind them. And it's just an endless letting go. I realized I was trying so hard to confirm no-self, and that confirming was creating a duality between confirmed and confirmer, and I was scared of the possibility of never being able to confirm or know something, 100%. I can't say that something fell away, can't confirm whether this is self or no-self. It's just like BOOM, this appearance, then gone then BOOM... again and again. It really feels like nothing at all changed, and yet things DEFINITELY feel different. It's crazy how many things in my experience were thoughts that I didn't realize were thoughts. It's like all these thoughts that were trying to create or solidify a self (even though nothing ever actually solidified or came into being) are soooo obvious now in my experience, and they just fall away, and again and again. So weird. I'm not sure if the habits of selfing are gone, but it's so clear what I thought previously was a self in my experience never had anything behind it, at the center of it. Can't find the center, can't find anything that can actually form or suggest a self for even a split second.

Let me know what’s here when the need to locate a reference point completely falls away.

I'm not sure if it's fallen away forever, permanently, but when it's seen that the reference point was just a thought, reality is so immediate when you don't try to hold onto or push away anything. When things are let go of moment by moment, everything is so vivid and clear, the immediacy is wild. Just the scenery, the sights and the sounds, so shimmery and simple. The simplicity is astonishing bc you can't hold onto anything, so things are just unfolding over and over and over. No need to say whether this is self or no self, that I've figured it out or not. I feel like I have more to say but just can't find the words lol so this will have to do for now. I'll keep looking into the questions you posted before but I just wanted to give this update now so I didn't lose the wording I had.

I'll be away again this weekend and I won't have any reception - going to Kruger National Park for my birthday. I'll be back Sunday evening. Use the time to inquire constantly with all these questions .

Hope you enjoyed your birthday and nature! It's crazy how it's your birthday but you're the one giving me the presents lol! I'm so grateful for you, beyond words. Let me know what you think about all this.

Sorry couldn't help myself just wanted to say some more lol. I sound like a broken record prolly but the simplicty of appearances is so wild. No awareness, no consciousness, just the pure appearance of this computer, the typing, the sounds of the typing, the fan... I remember there was this inquiry question you asked me before, something like "is there a point where things become known? When does the knowing of and the knowing begin?" and yeah you're so right, things are immediately known without the need for a knower! The awareness and the object come together and disappear together, nothing moving from moment to moment. When the head turns from this appearance to the next, boom! Gone! Lol I'm bugging out I guess.

Hi Pablo
Thank you for your patience!

It seems like there was a shift in the meantime :)

But now look deeper…Is there a “someone” who just had a shift?
Or just more thoughts—arising now—claiming, “something happened”?
Can the immediacy now ever not be?
Or is it only thoughts that say, “I lost it” or “I had it earlier”?
What is it that’s trying to make this permanent?
Can you find that urge to grasp and hold? What is it made of—exactly?
Can this shift be “confirmed”—without recreating the illusion of a confirmer?

We can still have a look at the decision maker as it needs to be seen not just generalised/bypassed – there is no self thus there is no decision maker ;). It’s up to you, please let me know
Love
Rali

Hi Rali,

No problem, thank you for all your great questions and continuing to push me deeper!

Is there a “someone” who just had a shift?
Or just more thoughts—arising now—claiming, “something happened”?

Yes, only thoughts can claim and try to categorize things into a definable, unchanging state. The realization goes far deeper than that, even though it seems likes some things need to clarify after what happened today.

Can the immediacy now ever not be?
Or is it only thoughts that say, “I lost it” or “I had it earlier”?

Definitely only thoughts say that "I lost it" or "it's different now", wanting to be that one "perfect" way it seemed like it was at one point. The impermanent nature of everything makes it very hard for things to stick, but there were a few times today where I got scared like I had lost. It felt like there were times where there was a reflex to "confirm" anatta, and I would be scared because things wouldn't "feel right", like it felt like some duality was being created. The duality though, came from trying to confirm this realization, which is not a matter of being confirmed with the mind. It made it feel like there was a confirmer there, but then I would see the "confirmer" was just another centerless, impermanent, sensation with no self in it or watching it or claiming it, that would dissolve. Happened a few times though.

What is it that’s trying to make this permanent?
Can you find that urge to grasp and hold? What is it made of—exactly?

The mind is and will absolutely try to make this permanent, which is absolutely impossible but it tries anyway. The urge seems to come from a thought that claims that the way this is is not satisfactory, and that it should be different.And then there's some fear that makes the thoughts feel stronger. But then I let go of it and it all dissolves.

Can this shift be “confirmed”—without recreating the illusion of a confirmer?

When I say it can't be confirmed, I mean it can't be confirmed by the mind. When the mind tries to confirm it, it "creates" the illusion of a confirmer. But when it is seen as how things are simply, beyond any mental confirmation or non-confirmation, it is the most obvious thing in the world that is self-confirming.

We can still have a look at the decision maker as it needs to be seen not just generalised/bypassed – there is no self thus there is no decision maker ;). It’s up to you, please let me know

Yes let's look into that! I don't want to leave absolutely anything un-tested. Excited to see what you'll say, talk to you soon.

Hi Pablo

But when it is seen as how things are simply, beyond any mental confirmation or non-confirmation, it is the most obvious thing in the world that is self-confirming."

If this is “the most obvious thing in the world”… to whom? Can that urge to “know for sure” be found outside thought? What is it in DE (remember cup of coffee exercise)?
Is there anything here that could own a realization?
Where is the seer of “the mind” (the one that sees what mind does, the simplicity of things)?

Does this “obviousness” require a knower—or is it just happening, freely, nakedly, without an owner, how it has always been?
Is there still some lingering sense that ‘this’ is a state you arrived in, or that you can leave?
If so—where’s the boundary? Where is the gate into “now”? Can anything ever exit this immediacy? We can have a look at time if you want...

Let me make this clear - this is not about states (bliss, happiness, etc). Is there an expectation that it all be peachy after that? This is about seeing how things are (by whom?). How is it possible to "maintain" something if things are just happening (look at choice and control below)? Present moment is just one present moment, and has anything to do with a duration of a certain state.
The loop that remains is often this:
“I know there’s no self” ← the subtle final self.
Burn even that. No one saw it. No one arrived. No insight was gained.
Just this, never not this, never not already the case.

And then there's some fear that makes the thoughts feel stronger. But then I let go of it and it all dissolves.

When fear arises—what actually happens?
Is there fear... and a you? Or just a sensation labelled “fear”? What makes that sensation stronger or grabbing? What is the meaning of that sensation without the story? Does anything in it says anything about what it is? LOOK!
What is that I that does the letting go? How exactly are you doing the letting go? Are you in charge of thoughts and actions? What is letting go in DE

I don't want to leave absolutely anything un-tested. Excited to see what you'll say, talk to you soon.

Let’s have a look at the idea of control, choice and decisions. Please explore the exercises below and report your findings! Remember that we’re looking for some kind of entity, a something, an ‘I’ which is doing the ‘choosing’. Sometimes we describe this sense of choosing as a ‘feeling’: It feels like ‘I’ did the ‘choosing’, but remember we are not interested in “seems like” and “feels like” entities, but ones that could be described.

1. Hold a hand in front of you; palm turned down. Now turn the palm up. And down...and up and so on.
How is the movement controlled?
Does a thought control it?
Can a ‘controller’ or and entity that is choosing be located?
How is the decision made to turn the hand over? Track any decision point when a thought MADE THE DECISION to turn the hand over.

2. Put two objects that you like in front of you (e.g. a cup of coffee and a glass of juice)

Step1. Look at drink A and at drink B. Think about their respective qualities, the things you like about them, compare and weigh the pros and cons of each. See if a preference is manifesting for one or the other.
Step2. Count to 5.
Step3. Choose one of the drinks. Pick it up and take a sip.

In step 1 when thinking about their respective qualities, did you ‘choose’ the qualities? Or did they kind of appear by themselves? If some preferences manifested, did you ‘choose’ these preferences? Or did they just pop up by themselves?

In step 2 when you counted to 5, if the preferences took the back seat while the numbers took the front seat, did you ‘choose’ this sequence of event? Did you ‘choose’ to shut down the preferences to give way to the counting? Did you directly experience an entity doing the ‘choosing’?

In step 3 where you made a choice, did anything arise that announced, ‘I am the chooser’? If so, what does it look like?

3. Please take me through a biggish decision that you made recently - not something very personal so you are able to share more details about your decision making...

How did it come to be? Consider all of the conditions that were necessary for it to happen. If any one of those conditions were different, would the outcome have been the same? How many of these conditions were outside of your influence? What was in your control (according to thought)?

If you can’t think of anything, make a decision right now. Any decision. Then rewind the tape. Where did the decision come from? Could it have been otherwise? Who or what decided?

Please take your time with each exercise! Repeat as many times as you need and then write the answers for all of them. Watch like a hawk. Don't go to thoughts, examine the actual experience. Do this as many times as you like, and each time inquire with the questions.
Love
Rali

Hi Rali,

Sorry for the late response, very busy yesterday.

If this is “the most obvious thing in the world”… to whom? Can that urge to “know for sure” be found outside thought? What is it in DE (remember cup of coffee exercise)?

Doesn't seem to be able to be found outside thought. It seems like in DE, it goes like this:

"Urge to know for sure"
Sensation - simply just the senses
Visual field - simply just the seeing
Thoughts trying to claim no-self as being this particular state- simply just thoughts

Is there anything here that could own a realization?
Where is the seer of “the mind” (the one that sees what mind does, the simplicity of things)?

As I keep looking, it's clear that nothing can own this realization, and no seer of the mind can be found outside of mental images and thoughts.

Does this “obviousness” require a knower—or is it just happening, freely, nakedly, without an owner, how it has always been?
Is there still some lingering sense that ‘this’ is a state you arrived in, or that you can leave?
If so—where’s the boundary? Where is the gate into “now”? Can anything ever exit this immediacy? We can have a look at time if you want...

I still need to keep looking at this, but it’s clear that what I thought was a knower was just another sensation, so what could know this? There could definitely be a lingering sense of this being a “state”, but whatever seems like a boundary is just another thought saying “I lost it” or “this isn’t it bc this or that feels wrong”.

Is there an expectation that it all be peachy after that? This is about seeing how things are (by whom?). How is it possible to "maintain" something if things are just happening (look at choice and control below)?

I think there are subtle expectations, like that this should feel more free or there should be almost no painful emotions/feelings. Or that things should look and feel a certain way, like more open, boundless and free. All just expectations of the mind. Yes, it’s clear in my experience that things are just happening due to the causes and conditions appearing in this moment, no controller or agent in it.

When fear arises—what actually happens?
Is there fear... and a you? Or just a sensation labelled “fear”? What makes that sensation stronger or grabbing? What is the meaning of that sensation without the story? Does anything in it says anything about what it is? LOOK!
What is that I that does the letting go? How exactly are you doing the letting go? Are you in charge of thoughts and actions? What is letting go in DE

All the fear is sensations and thoughts about what’s going on. When I look, there just that sensation of fear, no feeler or seer of the fear that can be found. No, only thoughts try to create some narrative around the sensations. The bare sensations have no story to tell. I can’t find any I that does the letting go, in direct experience letting go just feels like a relaxing into, that’s all. If it feels like there’s an I, that’s just another sensation that the mind claims is doing the letting go, but it’s clear that’s not the case.

How is the movement controlled?
Does a thought control it?
Can a ‘controller’ or and entity that is choosing be located?
How is the decision made to turn the hand over?

No a thought absolutely does not control it. No entity can be found choosing when to start or stop moving the hand or where to stop it. I really have no idea how it happens, maybe I can say there’s an intention to start or stop but even that feels like maybe a little too much. It just starts when it does and stops when it stops.

In step 1 when thinking about their respective qualities, did you ‘choose’ the qualities? Or did they kind of appear by themselves? If some preferences manifested, did you ‘choose’ these preferences? Or did they just pop up by themselves?

In step 2 when you counted to 5, if the preferences took the back seat while the numbers took the front seat, did you ‘choose’ this sequence of event? Did you ‘choose’ to shut down the preferences to give way to the counting? Did you directly experience an entity doing the ‘choosing’?

In step 3 where you made a choice, did anything arise that announced, ‘I am the chooser’? If so, what does it look like?

No, there definitely was never a chooser that was there, these preferences completely appeared by themselves and the sequence of events unfolded causally without there being some kind of agent who decided the train of thoughts or the sequence of events.

Where did the decision come from? Could it have been otherwise? Who or what decided?

It’s clear that the decision just unfolded and appeared when it did. Before I used to think it was clear that there was a decision maker because there would be some kind of strong sensation in the head and thoughts around it, but it’s clear the decision just appears when it does. If I was trying to solve a homework problem, I could never will tbe answer to come when I wanted, it always only came when it came. No agent or doer.

Sorry I meant to say before that yes I would definitely be down with looking into time!

Hi Pablo
Perfect looking. Razor sharp.

It’s clear that the decision just unfolded and appeared when it did. Before I used to think it was clear that there was a decision maker because there would be some kind of strong sensation in the head and thoughts around it, but it’s clear the decision just appears when it does. If I was trying to solve a homework problem, I could never will tbe answer to come when I wanted, it always only came when it came. No agent or doer.

Yes, it’s clear in my experience that things are just happening due to the causes and conditions appearing in this moment, no controller or agent in it.

So no agent, no doer, no decider. Thought tries to claim—after the fact. But the “doing” is always already happening. Spontaneously. Unknowably.

Here are a couple of interesting videos on the subject:
https://vimeo.com/90101368?fbclid=IwAR3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCtvAvZtJyE
I posted the second link before but I don’t know if you watched it

When I asked to share a decision that “you’ve made”, I just wanted a specific example of a decision that you would normally consider that you’ve made. The point was to look entirely in thought content where cause and effect “live” and see that even there there’s no “you” making a decision. It was just one event leading to another, leading to another, with “actions” based on previous conditioning. The thought “decision is made” is layered on top of other thoughts/beliefs/descriptions of what has happened before. Let's take this deeper...
Why does the wind blow? It just blows. Yes we can say it happens as a result of previous events but there’s no entity “wind” that does the blowing. There is no wind that decides to blow. It’s just language.
What is “moving of the hands” in DE? We’ve seen that it’s just a sensation, labelled “hands moving” + colour/shape labelled “hands moving”. So, what makes the sensations to appear? What makes seeing to appear? LOOK! Is there anything that causes anything to appear? Do cause and effect exist outside of thought content? To have causes and effects, first you need time and second you need inherently existing causes/things/objects/subjects. Do these exist without the labels? Thought comes to describe that things are happening and why they are happening, but in DE all is just happening. Is the description/explanation/label needed for things to happen?

Look even deeper… Do you see a border between sensations and colours, and/or sounds...? Close your eyes, listen to a sound. Now open your eyes. Does the sound appear in a different “place” to colours? Can you find an actual line/wall/boundary that divides the colour and the sound? Or is the line a mental construct?

I think there are subtle expectations, like that this should feel more free or there should be almost no painful emotions/feelings. Or that things should look and feel a certain way, like more open, boundless and free. All just expectations of the mind. Yes, it’s clear in my experience that things are just happening due to the causes and conditions appearing in this moment, no controller or agent in it.

Yes—exactly. And notice something crucial here:
Even the expectation that this should now feel “free” or “boundless”... is just another happening within what already is.
It doesn't prove the existence of a self, it proves its absence.
So ask now, directly:
If everything—including expectation, emotion, tension, the desire for it to be different—is already happening...
Where could a controller be hiding? What could possibly benefit out of this?
Can you find even the slightest gap between what appears… and who it's appearing to?
Look right now. Not in thought. In the rawness.
Is there a gap?
Or is it seamless—no experiencer, no experienced, just experience?
Don't describe it. Let it be seen. Stay in it. What's here now?
What is "free", what is "painful" in DE?

Sorry I meant to say before that yes I would definitely be down with looking into time!

Cool! I’ll have it in mind…
Love
Rali