The Gate

Hi Rali!

I hope you are doing awesome!

Fear is even more powerful pointer then resistance. Fear serves to protect core beliefs – like “I”, ”others”… The fear itself is not to be feared. It's a mechanism, working perfectly as a security system. It is protecting something. It is a sensation like resistance, that fires together with a thought. Look at fear and just let it be here. Find where in the body is being felt, bring it closer, invite it to share its wisdom. It's fine to just let it be. Respect it. Bow to it. Then look what is behind it. What is it protecting?

It is protecting the me from a perceive danger. The interesting part is that there is nothing to protect in the real sense and in the relative sense most of the time the perceive danger is not something that can cause a real threat to the body. Most of the fear that I have comes in social situations. Seems to me that thought has created a survival mechanism around the belief that not being accepted in the social order can create a survival danger for the mind and the body.

What is it like, then, to just be with the ‘fear’?

Just being with the fear is uncomfortable but resisting creates suffering. Also just being with the fear has started to weakened the fears. Some of them have disappear, but the ones related to social encounters are still somewhat strong.

Is the story that comes with it true?

The story that comes with fear are not true. They can appear very true and intense but they are just more thought. Even when a dangerous encounter has happened, like maybe almost crashing in the car, the thoughts of fear after are creating a story of something that may had happened but didn’t.

You can also watch this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJQcD588g2w

The video was very helpful thank you! As you said and the video reiterates, I have to be patient with the dissolution of old, habits, fears and beliefs. Who knows how long they have been there. I just have to keep inquiring into their nature and they will clarify eventually.

If you share what specific fears come up, I can help you LOOK,

A specific fear that comes very often is when I have to talk in public settings, like give a presentation or participate in a class or give my opinion in front of several people.
When I talk one on one with someone the fear comes less often.

Thank you very much for all your help and time, it has been very helpful.

Love
Deneb

Hi Deneb

The interesting part is that there is nothing to protect in the real sense and in the relative sense most of the time the perceive danger is not something that can cause a real threat to the body. Most of the fear that I have comes in social situations. Seems to me that thought has created a survival mechanism around the belief that not being accepted in the social order can create a survival danger for the mind and the body.

There is a lot unchecked beliefs here. First of all, is there really “relative sense” at all? Can a mirage of an oasis in the desert give you water in any way? A thought is never the actual experience – e.g. eating chocolate vs remembering eating chocolate. if they were then you would be able to taste the word 'sweet', hear the word 'music' and get wet with the thought 'water'. Some thoughts point to the actual, and some point to other thoughts, but the content of every single thought is just fiction (description/what gives meaning to what is happening).
Second, what are ‘mind’ and ‘body’, again? Can sensing be in danger? Can thinking be in danger? You see it all boils down to “who is in danger?”. Certain sensations appear and thoughts label them as “unpleasant”/”dangerous”, but dangerous for whom? You need a reference point for something to be deemed ‘safe’ or ‘dangerous’, without it, it is all neutral/ “one taste”, right?
Third, what others/social order in this oneness/THIS? Do the “I” and “others” exist in any way (i.e. relative existence; characters in a story), or they exist only as language (i.e. labels for experiences)? Do you see the difference? Please look at what you are saying and notice the beliefs and assumptions there. There is a belief in separate selves, selves that are separate from the whole/life/existence, and these isolated selves are living their lives in a world, which they are separate from and have a position in it (i.e. social order). But in reality, there is only THIS, whatever is happening right now.
Ask again, what identifies with thoughts, believes them, etc? Who/what is in danger?

A specific fear that comes very often is when I have to talk in public settings, like give a presentation or participate in a class or give my opinion in front of several people.
When I talk one on one with someone the fear comes less often.

This is a perfect example of old conditioning, where previously certain experiences have been labelled “unpleasant”. Certain sensations have always fired together with certain thoughts, leading to more sensations and so on. The only way to break the cycle is to stay with just the sensations (experience their neutrality), without the thought content. Which one of them is the sensation of “dangerous”? Can you pinpoint it? What is that sensation without the label? Is the sensation “dangerous” itself? Inquire into the sensation and ask if the sensation itself knows anything about ‘danger’. Stay with the sensation, experience everything fully. Let it play out. Stories becomes sticky when it is invested with emotion. The “glue” is made of belief. Where the focus goes, story follows. But when focus goes onto the sensations, when the focus goes away from the thoughts and into raw experiencing, release happens.
Also, who has responsibility for the outcome of the situation (i.e. public speaking)? Is anything about the outcome in your control?
Love
Rali

Hi Rali!

Hope everything is well.

First of all, is there really “relative sense” at all? Can a mirage of an oasis in the desert give you water in any way?

There is no “relative sense”, there is just what is. “Relative sense” is a concept to create a story around the I sense, I can see it more clearly now.

Second, what are ‘mind’ and ‘body’, again?

Mind and body are sensation. This is still not clear enough as you can see, haha. Now that you point at it I can see it in DE. I have to keep bringing the attention to DE experience, otherwise thoughts cover what is happening with more thoughts.

Can sensing be in danger?

Sensing cannot be in danger. Thought creates the story that the I can be in danger, which is another thought and neither of them can be in danger.

Can thinking be in danger?

Thinking cannot be in danger either. However, thoughts create more thoughts and sensations of fear when the thought of “I am in danger” arises. When this is happening I have to put more attention to DE.

You see it all boils down to “who is in danger?”. Certain sensations appear and thoughts label them as “unpleasant”/”dangerous”, but dangerous for whom?

They are dangerous to no one. They are only more thoughts creating a someone that can be hurt.

You need a reference point for something to be deemed ‘safe’ or ‘dangerous’, without it, it is all neutral/ “one taste”, right?

Yes there needs to be a reference point to be able to compare, otherwise is only one. It is amazing how thought creates all this differences that are not actually true.

Third, what others/social order in this oneness/THIS?

The social order is a concept created by the thought. If there is only oneness, there cannot be others or a social order. This can be seen but it is not yet clarified. It feels that there are others and separation.

Do the “I” and “others” exist in any way (i.e. relative existence; characters in a story), or they exist only as language (i.e. labels for experiences)?

This is very subtle, I perceive others but I can also see in DE that there is only what is happening, but the belief that there are others clouds the DE. I will keep pointing attention to direct experience.

Do you see the difference?

I can see the difference. It is very subtle, but I can see it. The thought that there are others is very strong and clouds my direct experience, but it is getting clearer that it is only a thought.

Ask again, what identifies with thoughts, believes them, etc?

More thoughts, the thought “I am”, it creates a chain of thoughts one after the other. The belief is more thoughts.

Who/what is in danger?

There is no one in danger, thought arises and creates the illusion that someone is in danger. It creates a story of a body, a self interacting with a world and others.

The only way to break the cycle is to stay with just the sensations (experience their neutrality), without the thought content. Which one of them is the sensation of “dangerous”?

The sensation of tension in the chest and the stomach. When it is very intense, the whole body becomes very tense, and hands start to sweat.

Can you pinpoint it?

Yes now is very clear where the sensation is. It is easier to feel it and let it play out. It is still very uncomfortable but is not as overwhelming.

What is that sensation without the label?

The sensation without the label it is just sensation. There is no more to it.

Is the sensation “dangerous” itself?

The sensation is not dangerous, it can feel very uncomfortable but it is just what its happening.

Also, who has responsibility for the outcome of the situation (i.e. public speaking)?

There is no one who has responsibility for the outcome of the situation. Is only a thought that there is someone speaking.

Is anything about the outcome in your control?

If there is no one speaking or doing then there is no one that is responsible for the outcome. Things are just happening.

Thank you very much for your pointers they are very helpful to keep inquiring into DE.

Love

Deneb

Hi Deneb

Mind and body are sensation.

Actually ‘mind’ is a label for thinking and ‘body’ is a label for sensing.

Yes there needs to be a reference point to be able to compare, otherwise is only one. It is amazing how thought creates all this differences that are not actually true.

Yes that’s right! There is only unceasing sensing and thinking coming along isolating specific parts, naming them and layering more content and judgement on top. The different sensations are labelled “pleasant’/’unpleasant’. What I mean with “one taste” is that when examined on this isolated level these “sensations” are neutral - they all have “one taste” (i.e. sensing)

If there is no one speaking or doing then there is no one that is responsible for the outcome. Things are just happening.

Yes!! Also, as you saw even in thought content where cause and effect exist – it’s one event leading to another, leading to another, shaping the “outcome”

However, thoughts create more thoughts and sensations of fear when the thought of “I am in danger” arises.

Just a reminder…can thoughts do anything – create more thoughts, sensations… - or is it just thinking_sensinsing_.../ just THIS?

This is very subtle, I perceive others but I can also see in DE that there is only what is happening, but the belief that there are others clouds the DE. I will keep pointing attention to direct experience.

The thought that there are others is very strong and clouds my direct experience, but it is getting clearer that it is only a thought.

Can the “I” of “others” be directly experienced? Can you directly experience "others"? is there a place where the seeing (DE), is coming from, or seeing (DE) is all that there is? Is there a point of view (seer)? Is there a need for a seer? Are others somehow outside of seeing? What is the difference between seeing an ‘stranger’, seeing an ’enemy’, and seeing a ‘friend’ in DE (without thought content) – they are all colour with different thought content, right? How is one colour different from another in DE, if all there is to colour is seeing?
In DE there is only seeing/hearing/etc. and thinking provides the labels. It’s like a picture that everything is drawn in pencil on paper – the illusion of separation is created by different colours used – otherwise it’s all paper.



Different colours in seeing create the illusion of things but all that is there is seeing. Different levels of sounds create the illusion of a song but all that is there is hearing. Can you see that?

Also, when you touch 'another', are there two sensations one of 'you' and one of 'other' or just one/just sensing? Are others outside of sensing? Where is the border that marks where sensing ends and "other" begin?
Further, is there space where these others exist? What is the difference between “here” and “there”, "up" and "down", "left" and "right" without thought content?

Love
Rali

Hi Rali!

I hope you are doing great!

Can the “I” of “others” be directly experienced?

The I of others cannot be directly experienced. The I of others is a thought, just as the me is a thought. If there is no me thought, there is no I in others thought.

Can you directly experience "others"?

I cannot experience others in direct experience. There can be the thought “others are there” but cannot experience others.

is there a place where the seeing (DE), is coming from, or seeing (DE) is all that there is?

Seeing is all that there is, is not coming from anywhere. Seeing is here with the rest of experience.

Is there a point of view (seer)?

There is a thought that says I am here and the rest is over there, creating an illusion of point of view(seer). But with close attention there is just seeing.

Is there a need for a seer?

There is no need for a seer, seeing happens regardless of the illusion of seer.

Are others somehow outside of seeing?

Others cannot be outside of the seeing, is like the analogy of the dream, anything that is in the seeing cannot be outside, otherwise it would not be there. Inside and outside are concepts/thoughts.

What is the difference between seeing an ‘stranger’, seeing an ’enemy’, and seeing a ‘friend’ in DE (without thought content) – they are all colour with different thought content, right?

Yes they are all colors with different thought content. Thought content gives the labels of friend, enemy, stranger etc. This pointing is very useful, I’ll have to keep pointing at this in order to clarify it in direct experience.

How is one colour different from another in DE, if all there is to colour is seeing?

At the moment thought is still dominating over direct experience, therefore all I see is difference in color, not yet perceive just seeing without thought creating the illusion of separate colors.

Different colours in seeing create the illusion of things but all that is there is seeing. Different levels of sounds create the illusion of a song but all that is there is hearing. Can you see that?

This is very subtle and cannot see it in direct experience. With hearing is more evident that there is only hearing but with seeing I still experience separation, things.

Also, when you touch 'another', are there two sensations one of 'you' and one of 'other' or just one/just sensing?

There is just sensing, there is no other. No separation in sensing is more evident, clearer.

Are others outside of sensing?

Others are no outside of sensing, they are one and the same, otherwise there would not be any sensing.

Where is the border that marks where sensing ends and "other" begin?

There is no border. The border is a thought that creates the illusion of separation.

Further, is there space where these others exist?

If there is no others, there cannot be any space where they exist. The space is a thought.

What is the difference between “here” and “there”, "up" and "down", "left" and "right" without thought content?

There is no difference because if there is no here and there or up and down, etc. there is only here, what is. Like we said in our previous conversation if there is no thing to compare, there is only this what is here happening, the rest are just labels/thoughts.

Thank you very much, for all the pointers and clear seeing. Thought is still very strong when seeing, there is not just seeing, thought is still creating a veil.

Love

Deneb

Hi Deneb

Different colours in seeing create the illusion of things but all that is there is seeing. Different levels of sounds create the illusion of a song but all that is there is hearing. Can you see that?

This is very subtle and cannot see it in direct experience. With hearing is more evident that there is only hearing but with seeing I still experience separation, things.

Thinking is like a pattern detector. Every combination of colour is labelled and identified as a thing. This could be useful in communication. Labels try to describe things, point to things. The problem is that some labels point to existing stuff – like a “table” and other labels point to non-existing stuff – like “Santa” and “I” which exist only in language/thought content. Thus, a clear distinction between these is important, as most suffering arises here. Recognition is the moment when we know that we know. What "DE" does is accentuating the experience of the senses isolated from the old thought content, so the thought content can be adjusted to describe the experience better. That’s all that is “different”. The shift is very subtle. Can thoughts affect anything or they just try to describe what actually is happening? Yes, “I” a “others” are illusory but there IS something there – there is seeing, hearing, etc (experiencing), which appear as them. And because they are an illusion, they or their absence cannot affect the reality. Like the Kanizsa Triangle – you know it is an illusion, but it can look the same even after truth about it is known.

Thoughts just point to experiencing, give it meaning that can be passed. So, you will continue to use the same language, using pronouns, nouns, etc. but their use will be limited to just that once their illusory nature is seen. There is an old saying in Zen: “In the beginning, mountains are mountains and rivers are rivers; later on, mountains are not mountains and rivers are not rivers; and still later, mountains are mountains and rivers are rivers.” What do you think it means?

Others cannot be outside of the seeing, is like the analogy of the dream, anything that is in the seeing cannot be outside, otherwise it would not be there. Inside and outside are concepts/thoughts.

Yes!! When you sleep and dream at night, there are people, who say things, do things, etc., but do they really exist or is it just dreaming? And where do “others” go when the dream is over? When do they go if there is no memory (thought content) about it?

At the moment thought is still dominating over direct experience, therefore all I see is difference in color, not yet perceive just seeing without thought creating the illusion of separate colors.

Now, look! For an illusion to be seen as that or not, there is a need for a reference point (a center) - something to identify with thoughts, believe them. So, check is there anything that believes them or doesn’t? Is there “believing” or just thinking?

You’re not in charge of thinking so you can’t change it – it changes on its own :). But why is thinking content so important - you've seen already that it is not 100% correct when it comes to accuracy. It’s not simply about ignoring thoughts (you can’t do that ), but rather to SEE thoughts for what they are. Just fantasies, just figments of imagination, without any roots in reality. Just notice what is ‘underneath’ all thoughts. Thoughts add an overlaying narrative of names, labels, interpretations, explanations over the simplicity of what is. Instead of endlessly reaching for ideas, concepts and explanations, just let it all go, and see. Just see what is here now silently, without words. Just notice what is left when there is no thinking about it. Once you can see this, you will stop endlessly frustrating yourself by trying to figure out how things are. Just look, what is it that is separate from what is, and trying to figure out how things are? Is there a self or me here, who is separate and isolated from what is, from reality, and thus is in need to understand reality? Reality/THIS is not an idea or a belief. It cannot be grasped by thoughts. It does not need to be understood by the intellect. Actually, it is impossible to understand through thoughts. It is inconceivable, ungraspable. And yet, it can be directly seen.

The I of others cannot be directly experienced. The I of others is a thought, just as the me is a thought. If there is no me thought, there is no I in others thought.

It’s not the same approach as the looking for the “I” when it comes to ”others” as you can’t really see that that they don’t have an “I” – it’s a deduction (thinking). How we approach it from DE is the same way we see there is no “apple” – that apple is a label. How are objects different from ‘others’? Why were objects easier? What about animals? If we have to repeat the same example but with a “person”:
Taste labelled ‘person’ is known
Color (visual information) labelled ‘person’ is known
Sensation labelled ‘person’ is known (when a person is touched)
Smell labelled ‘person’ is known
Thought about/of a ‘person’ is known
However, is a ‘person' actually known? (Or is it just a label?) Is there really an ‘person’ here, or only color and a thought ABOUT ‘person’? Can ‘a person’ be found in actual experience?

Love
Rali

Hi Deneb
Is everything OK? I havent heard from you since Tuesday.
Love
Rali

Hi Rali!

How are you, I hope everything is going awesome!
I am sorry for the delay in my response, this week has been very busy. I am in the final part of the programming bootcamp, I started an internship on Monday in a company. I’ve been super busy. It is crazy how much stuff I've been learning.

Thank you very much for asking if I am ok.

What "DE" does is accentuating the experience of the senses isolated from the old thought content, so the thought content can be adjusted to describe the experience better. That’s all that is “different”.

I am trying to clarify this paragraph. DE accentuates the experience of the senses and this changes the old thought patterns in order to the describe the experience better, but it is still only a description, part of the reality, never the reality that never changes?

Can thoughts affect anything or they just try to describe what actually is happening?

Thoughts cannot affect anything, they are just trying to describe what is actually happening. And this description brings a lot of old patterns of thought, not really creating an accurate description.

There is an old saying in Zen: “In the beginning, mountains are mountains and rivers are rivers; later on, mountains are not mountains and rivers are not rivers; and still later, mountains are mountains and rivers are rivers.” What do you think it means?

I think it means that in the beginning you see/experience mountains and rivers as they are, then you create a thought pattern/concept of what mountains and rivers are, and finally when you see thought for what it is, you experience mountains and rivers for what they are without the filtering/concept of thoughts.

When you sleep and dream at night, there are people, who say things, do things, etc., but do they really exist or is it just dreaming?

They do not exit it is just dreaming.

And where do “others” go when the dream is over?

They don’t go anywhere, because they were never separate from dreaming. Dreaming happens everything in the dream appears, dreaming ends content in dreams ends.

When do they go if there is no memory (thought content) about it?

They go when the dream stops. Memory about them is just thought happening.

For an illusion to be seen as that or not, there is a need for a reference point (a center) - something to identify with thoughts, believe them. So, check is there anything that believes them or doesn’t?

There is not a thing that believes thought, it is just more thought. There is no reference point, the thought of I that creates the illusion of reference point (center) is also I thought. It the best magic trick ever haha.

Is there “believing” or just thinking?

There is thinking, the speed of the thoughts creates the illusion of continuity and reference point.

Just look, what is it that is separate from what is, and trying to figure out how things are?

There is nothing that is separate from what is, thoughts are not separate from what is. Thoughts create the illusion of separation. I cannot yet see how this phenomena happens but it is clarifying and sometimes it is clear. Trying to figure how things are, are thoughts.

Is there a self or me here, who is separate and isolated from what is, from reality, and thus is in need to understand reality?

There is no self or me, who is separate or isolated. There is thoughts that create the illusion of separation from reality. How this work is not clear yet, but there is an intuition that nothing can be separate.

How we approach it from DE is the same way we see there is no “apple” – that apple is a label. How are objects different from ‘others’?

Objects are not different from others. Thoughts labels them and creates a difference which is not true. Objects are colors in the visual field. I cannot yet see this clearly in DE, but if there are only colors then there are not different object.

Why were objects easier?

Objects easier because thoughts do not create stories around them.

What about animals?

Animals become a little harder not so see for what they are because thoughts create narratives around them, stories and also attaches feelings to them and with humans in creates even more complex stories and feeling. At the end of the day they are only thoughts, but becomes harder to see the illusion.

However, is a ‘person' actually known? (Or is it just a label?)

A “person” is not actually known. There are thoughts/lables of person.

Is there really an ‘person’ here, or only color and a thought ABOUT ‘person’?

It is not clear yet that there is only color and thought about a person, but it is clarifying. The reaction that comes from the belief of there being a person is weakening.

Can ‘a person’ be found in actual experience?

The concepts of a person been found are still dominant, therefore even though there is no person in direct experience, it seems that way. This is not yet clarified. But the good news is that inquiry is intensifying during the day and during my practice.

Thank you very much for your time and your patience!
I'll try not to take so long to answer. Things are getting better at work.

Love

Deneb

Hi Deneb

I am sorry for the delay in my response, this week has been very busy. I am in the final part of the programming bootcamp, I started an internship on Monday in a company. I’ve been super busy. It is crazy how much stuff I've been learning.

No problem. I'm glad you are enjoying it! Life is happening. It would be nice, though, if you let me know that you’ll need time just to know that you haven’t given up on the inquiry. There are more than twenty waiting for a guide.

I am trying to clarify this paragraph. DE accentuates the experience of the senses and this changes the old thought patterns in order to the describe the experience better, but it is still only a description, part of the reality, never the reality that never changes?

Well, thoughts and mental images are real only as the actual experience of arising thoughts and mental images, their ‘presence’ cannot be denied. However their contents, what they are about, are not ‘real’, they are just fantasies. However, some thoughts point to existing phenomena (seeing, hearing, etc.) and others to non-existent (like “I”). Do you see the difference?

I think it means that in the beginning you see/experience mountains and rivers as they are, then you create a thought pattern/concept of what mountains and rivers are, and finally when you see thought for what it is, you experience mountains and rivers for what they are without the filtering/concept of thoughts.

That’s part of the answer. Before you start the inquiry, you see mountains and rivers as objects, then during the inquiry you see them for what they truly are without thought content, and at the end of the inquiry, life continues to be the same as before – you still use labels but their true nature is known to be empty of intrinsic meaning.

There is no self or me, who is separate or isolated. There is thoughts that create the illusion of separation from reality. How this work is not clear yet, but there is an intuition that nothing can be separate.

Well, how does the mirage of an oasis in the desert work? It’s an illusion – it looks like something else than what it is, but when it is examined closely, it is seen that it’s just desert, no oasis there. Is that clearer now? Separation is another illusion – it looks like things are separated, but only because of artificially separating "things" through labelling them. Can you separate/isolate the "bird" from the "sky"?

Think of a cup. Get a very clear picture in your mind. See clearly the size, shape, colour and volume of the cup. Notice whether it is decorated or plain. Notice whether it has a handle. Notice whether it is heavy or fragile. Do you have a clear picture in mind?
Can you physically grasp that image of a cup? Can you pour tea into it? Can you drink from it? Is there a ‘real’ cup or just an image of a cup? Is the content of the mental image (the cup) ‘real’?

Objects easier because thoughts do not create stories around them.

“People” are more difficult because of “emotions”. Stories are always stickier when there is an emotion (sensation + thought). The “glue” that makes it sticky is unchecked beliefs. Do you see that?

There is some contradiction in the next statements:

There is not a thing that believes thought, it is just more thought. There is no reference point, the thought of I that creates the illusion of reference point (center) is also I thought. It the best magic trick ever haha.

Trying to figure how things are, are thoughts.

It is not clear yet that there is only color and thought about a person, but it is clarifying. The reaction that comes from the belief of there being a person is weakening.

It is not clear to whom? Who has a problem with beliefs? Who identifies with them? What is the bond (reaction) with the belief made of?

The concepts of a person been found are still dominant, therefore even though there is no person in direct experience, it seems that way. This is not yet clarified. But the good news is that inquiry is intensifying during the day and during my practice.

So there is a DE that “people” is a label but there are doubts about it. What is doubt?

Anyway, why do you think that labelling will change? The label “people” points to existing stuff – images, sounds, smells, etc, but does the label “others” exist intrinsically? The analogy with the icons on your computer desktop comes handy. They are used as a representation of what is actually a binary code – zeros and ones - so you can make use of them. But is there an actual mail box under the icon for an email? Labels are useful in language, but they are empty (like the cup mentioned earlier). Realizing the empty nature of all concepts frees the mind. Holding on to ideas creates limitation, opinions, differences, and suffering. When it is seen that all concepts are empty, the focus on thinking diminishes. Stories about past and future eventually stop playing out. “Shoulds” and “should nots” become less important, and the story becomes transparent. The story does not disappear, but it is seen as empty, not solid, not that serious, and, sometimes, even hilarious. It still appears that there is a “me” and “others”, but it is known to be useful concepts, not the truth. Then, the thinking can relax and come back to its natural state of being open, curious, joyful, playful, and free. Experience is no longer attempted to be fitted and organized into a frame of fixed ideas.

No one can convince you that you recognize something. Of course you can pretend and say that you do and make logical explanations, express opinions, have debates, write books, and teach about it. But deep knowing comes from within, from looking for yourself, from wanting to know beyond doubt. So LOOK! Are there others in DE (without thought content)?
Love
Rali

Hi Rali!
I hope you are doing great!

However, some thoughts point to existing phenomena (seeing, hearing, etc.) and others to non-existent (like “I”). Do you see the difference?

Yes I can see more clearly the difference when thoughts point to existing phenomena and when they point to non-existent phenomena like “I”.

Well, how does the mirage of an oasis in the desert work? It’s an illusion – it looks like something else than what it is, but when it is examined closely, it is seen that it’s just desert, no oasis there.

The mirage of an oasis work by appearing as an illusion of water but there is no water. Thoughts of like “I” are the same they appear to be solid, “a person”, but are only thoughts.

Is that clearer now? Separation is another illusion – it looks like things are separated, but only because of artificially separating "things" through labeling them. Can you separate/isolate the "bird" from the "sky"?

It is getting clearer, how the labeling creates the illusion of separation. The stronger the inquiry gets the clearer it is seen the illusion thought create.

Think of a cup. Get a very clear picture in your mind. See clearly the size, shape, colour and volume of the cup. Notice whether it is decorated or plain. Notice whether it has a handle. Notice whether it is heavy or fragile. Do you have a clear picture in mind?
Can you physically grasp that image of a cup?

I cannot physically grasp the image of a cup.

Can you pour tea into it?

No, I cannot pour tea into it.

Can you drink from it?

I cannot drink from it.

Is there a ‘real’ cup or just an image of a cup?

Is just an image/thought of a cup.

Is the content of the mental image (the cup) ‘real’?

The content of the mental image of cup is not ‘real’. It is a thought that does not point to existing phenomena.

“People” are more difficult because of “emotions”. Stories are always stickier when there is an emotion (sensation + thought). The “glue” that makes it sticky is unchecked beliefs. Do you see that?

Yes I can see that unchecked beliefs create emotions that make stories stickier. More and more belief are coming to the surface and I’ve been able to see them for what they are. It has been very uncomfortable lately. All week has been very uncomfortable, all this beliefs have been coming very strongly and creating all kind of stories. The positive thing is that I been able to just let them be and see them for what they are for the most part, but sometimes it has been very intense.
I been feeling a lot of fear, which I think prevents deeper beliefs to come to the surface.

There is some contradiction in the next statements:

There is not a thing that believes thought, it is just more thought. There is no reference point, the thought of I that creates the illusion of reference point (center) is also I thought. It the best magic trick ever haha.
Trying to figure how things are, are thoughts.
It is not clear yet that there is only color and thought about a person, but it is clarifying. The reaction that comes from the belief of there being a person is weakening.

It is not clear to whom?

I can see the contradiction. There is no one that it is clear to, and there will never be. It is just labels happening and making the illusion of being there more than color, creating the illusion of a person.

Who has a problem with beliefs?

There is no one that has a problem with beliefs. These are thoughts that create the illusion of someone having a problem with beliefs and more thoughts to solve the problem.

Who identifies with them?

No one identifies with them, the “I” thought creates the illusion that there is someone believing and suffering but it is just more thought. The pointing is amazing at clearing this up.

What is the bond (reaction) with the belief made of?

The bond with the belief is made of thought and emotions. When seen, they are still there and emotions can be uncomfortable but it not as intense and their life spans is shorter.

So there is a DE that “people” is a label but there are doubts about it. What is doubt?

Doubt is a thought and very sneaky. Lately there have been thoughts like this: “Maybe I will never wake up”. Thoughts of doubt have intensified, but also inquiry into their nature has intensified to so even thought they are uncomfortable they are helping with the inquiry.

Anyway, why do you think that labelling will change?

I can see that the labeling will continue, is just a way to communicate. What creates the suffering is not seeing labels/thoughts for what they are.

The label “people” points to existing stuff – images, sounds, smells, etc, but does the label “others” exist intrinsically?

Others does not exist intrinsically, is a thought like “I” it does not point to existing phenomena. It can create an illusion if not seen for what is.

The analogy with the icons on your computer desktop comes handy. They are used as a representation of what is actually a binary code – zeros and ones - so you can make use of them. But is there an actual mail box under the icon for an email?

There is not an actual mail box under the icon for an email. I can see how others is just a label, useful for communication but there is not actual others or there is not an actual “me”.

Thank you very much for all your great pointing, my inquiry is getting stronger. I’ll keep looking!

Love

Deneb

Hi Deneb

Yes I can see that unchecked beliefs create emotions that make stories stickier. More and more belief are coming to the surface and I’ve been able to see them for what they are. It has been very uncomfortable lately. All week has been very uncomfortable, all this beliefs have been coming very strongly and creating all kind of stories. The positive thing is that I been able to just let them be and see them for what they are for the most part, but sometimes it has been very intense.
I been feeling a lot of fear, which I think prevents deeper beliefs to come to the surface.

When fear appears, it just shows that there are areas that have not been examined and need to be explored with DE. Peace eventually comes with not minding what happens. When “uncomfortable” experiences appear, there are usually thoughts how things should be different and the unpleasant should not be here. But these are just thoughts. Staying with the uncomfortable, welcoming it, eventually changes the belief and the story drops away. The story is way more enjoyable without a "me" and the fear that something can happen to this “me.” Once it’s clearly seen that there is no actual me, there is no place for the story to stick (to form an identity). Whatever happens feels okay.

Doubt is a thought and very sneaky. Lately there have been thoughts like this: “Maybe I will never wake up”. Thoughts of doubt have intensified, but also inquiry into their nature has intensified to so even thought they are uncomfortable they are helping with the inquiry.

You see, doubt is another way of resisting and protecting the imaginary self. Why is something, that is seen as lie, still believed? When you have two opposing views you have to keep checking their validity. When new thoughts appear they either stick the old thoughts (fit with the beliefs like puzzle pieces) or not – what we call confirmation bias. Conformation bias saves time and energy with discarding new ideas that do not fit with the rest. DE, though, checks with the senses what truly is happening. It might seem that it involves effort but is there anybody that is exercising this effort or is it just happening on its own – effortless effort?

Doubt is mostly unchecked beliefs that are coming to the surface to be examined. So, the cure for doubt is just more LOOKING :)! That means question everything you are certain about. It may take a few months to settle in, but everyone is different, so there is no way to know how long it will take for everything to be re-examined. Sometimes it is intense, sometimes it’s gentle, but there is no finish line, only falling deeper and deeper into peace. Looking is the tool that has to be used over and over again. All this old conditioning has to be seen for what it is. It wasn’t created in a day so it will take time to re-examine all of it. The best part is that the cleaning happens on its own – it takes care of itself.

BUT!!! What is there to wake up – another belief that needs to be busted. Is there an expectation for fireworks? Remember, when realisation happens, it can be very subtle and if there are expectations of any kind, then it can be missed. I can promise you there will be no fireworks; it is just a subtle shift in perception! The only true expectation, that you can have, is that the seeking will end. So is there still seeking?

Is there anything else you want to explore?
Love
Rali

Hi Rali!

I hope everything is well!

You see, doubt is another way of resisting and protecting the imaginary self. Why is something, that is seen as lie, still believed?

It has not been seen thoroughly, from what I can see there is the belief that there is someone having the thoughts. The belief is getting weaker, but it is still there. The more I don’t resist what is happening it gets clearer that the “I” feeling is just an illusion.

Conformation bias saves time and energy with discarding new ideas that do not fit with the rest. DE, though, checks with the senses what truly is happening. It might seem that it involves effort but is there anybody that is exercising this effort or is it just happening on its own – effortless effort?

It is happening on its own, even the resistance is happening on its own. Thought comes after things have already happened, just like in the video you show me, and takes ownership of what happened.

BUT!!! What is there to wake up

There in no one to wake up, it is just a wrong perception.

Is there an expectation for fireworks?

I think there is still a belief that things will change, that being uncomfortable will not be there anymore. But I am realizing that it does not matter if there is comfort or discomfort, it is all part of what is happening. Including the resistance to the resistance is just what it is happening.

So is there still seeking?

There is still seeking but it is getting clearer where to look to dissolve it. It is like you have said, the cleaning is happening on its own.

Is there anything else you want to explore?

What do you think? Do you think we should continue with the inquiry together or you think I am ready to go on my own?
How can I know I am not fooling myself, believe there is no separation, but there is still separation? Thought is very sneaky haha.

Thank you for all you help, the inquiry is getting a lot of momentum!

Love

Deneb

Hi Deneb

It has not been seen thoroughly, from what I can see there is the belief that there is someone having the thoughts. The belief is getting weaker, but it is still there. The more I don’t resist what is happening it gets clearer that the “I” feeling is just an illusion.

Tell me what "someone having thoughts" means. How is it different from thoughts just appearing and disappearing? Also, please have a look if there is anyone there to spring them into existence. Do you choose what kind of thoughts to have? Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear? Could you have done anything to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead? Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts? Can you choose not to have painful, negative or fearful thoughts? Can you pick and choose any kind of thought? Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Are you the narrator or the one that listens to the narration? What makes thoughts yours? Do thoughts have “your voice”? Have you ever been able to record thoughts as they spontaneously arise and then play them back in order to hear them, and to hear that they are in your voice? How is a mental image different than a mental sound? So do thoughts actually have a sound? Or is the ‘voice in the head’ simply thoughts about sound?

I think there is still a belief that things will change, that being uncomfortable will not be there anymore. But I am realizing that it does not matter if there is comfort or discomfort, it is all part of what is happening. Including the resistance to the resistance is just what it is happening.

Again, beliefs are there but what believes them? What is not comfortable? LOOK! Is there anything that suffers or are there just thoughts about suffering (being uncomfortable)? What is comfort without thought content? What is discomfort without thought content?
This is not about blissful states. All states come and go and are not permanent. Seeing is pattern recognition, not a change of a state. It’s a change of view. Wanting comfort is just that – wanting. There is a story about trying to be comfortable and not succeeding. The commentary is just like a radio, but there is no choice of channels. You wish you could surf channels, because then your life would be great: all positive, fun, peaceful, and lovely. But you have only one channel, and it’s telling the same old stories over and over again.

When beliefs start falling, when certainty is no longer there, it may be scary and painful, but all of this is part of the cleaning-up process. Bring attention to the here and now, notice what is happening, rest in being, and, at the same time, question all beliefs— one by one.

What do you think? Do you think we should continue with the inquiry together or you think I am ready to go on my own?

I’m here for you no matter what you “decide”. There is no rush. There are no medals handed at the end. There is no end :). So, let’s make sure that it is crystal clear there is no “I” in any form or shape!

How can I know I am not fooling myself, believe there is no separation, but there is still separation? Thought is very sneaky haha.

Again, a report of doubtful thoughts - not DE/what is happening but thinking content - ...so LOOK! You don't have to believe things, you can just LOOK! Who/what is there to believe/not believe stuff? Is there a separation, to start with? Separation is an illusion (a belief), created by labelling (thinking). The big question is who/what sees/believes the illusion (where is the reference point). It boils down again to what identifies with thoughts. There is a belief in a separate self, a self that is separate from life/existence/THIS, and each isolated self is living their lives in a world, which they are separate from. But when you LOOK, there is only existence, whatever is happening right now. There are no parts, no fragments. Is there someone separate from life, waiting to wake up to reality? LOOK! Is there a self or me here, who is separate and isolated from what is, from reality, and thus is in need to understand reality? What is it that is separate from what is, and trying to figure out how things are? Or letting go happens on its own effortlessly, when the futility of trying to grasp what is with thoughts is recognized?

Truth or reality is not an idea or a belief. It cannot be grasped by thoughts. Thoughts are never the real deal. When we look at what is obvious, without thinking or referring to a memory, without trying to fit it into models of reality or to match it to the descriptions given by teachers, there is an intimate, instant recognition. THIS is. This is what is happening now; the rest is a story.
Love
Rali

Deneb

Hi Rali!
I hope everything is going well!

Tell me what "someone having thoughts" means. How is it different from thoughts just appearing and disappearing?

Yes it is not different “someone having thoughts” than any other thought. The thought “this is happening to me” is just another thought or the sensation of “me” having this experience is only sensation. Looking has make this clearer. Looking for the one having thoughts or experiences.

Also, please have a look if there is anyone there to spring them into existence. Do you choose what kind of thoughts to have?

I cannot choose what thoughts to have. This is very evident when there are periods of silence during the day or during my meditation practice. But if the stream of thoughts is continuous is harder to notice that thoughts are just appearing from nowhere, without choice. It seems that there is someone making them because of the story.

Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear?

No, they just appear. When there is a chain of thoughts it appears that there is someone having the thoughts but these chains don’t last very long before another unrelated thought comes along. If you haven’t point this out, I normally don’t pay attention to this.

Could you have done anything to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead?

There is not a thing a could have done to make a different thought appear at any moment. This is a very common thought that arises, the thought that “I could have done or thought differently” like if we had a choice in the matter, creating the illusion of agency, if not seen as another thought.

Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts?

I cannot select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts. This pointing is such a revelation, and it is very helpful to weaken the resistance to unpleasant thoughts. See them for what they are.

Can you choose not to have painful, negative or fearful thoughts?

No, they just appear out of nowhere and disappear. They come and go, if resisted they stick longer, otherwise they move along faster.

Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?

I cannot choose any kind of thought, and when I try, attention goes to thoughts, and they get quiet.

Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing?

It is not possible to prevent a thought from appearing, and when trying to do this, the thought that is trying to be prevented arises more.

Are you the narrator or the one that listens to the narration?

The one that listens to the narration.

What makes thoughts yours?

The me feeling combine with the I though create the illusion of thoughts being mine. But they are only sensation and thought.

Do thoughts have “your voice”?

Thoughts have a certain characteristic that seems to be my voice, like the previous question a narrator kind of feeling. But when look closely it is also thought this characteristic.

Have you ever been able to record thoughts as they spontaneously arise and then play them back in order to hear them, and to hear that they are in your voice?

No they come so fast and spontaneously that it is impossible to record them and play back in order to hear them. And therefore, it is not possible to hear them in my voice.
It is really interesting how when looking for these thoughts they get quiet.

How is a mental image different than a mental sound?

There is no difference, both are thought. This took me a while to be able to see it, thoughts were so convincing that there was sound or image.

So do thoughts actually have a sound?

Thoughts do not have a sound.

Or is the ‘voice in the head’ simply thoughts about sound?

The voice in the head are simply thoughts about sound.

Again, beliefs are there but what believes them?

There is nothing that believes them. They are thoughts, one after the other that make the illusion of someone or thing believing.

What is not comfortable?

Nobody or nothing is not comfortable is a thought that says “I am in discomfort”, but sensation is just there without labels.

Is there anything that suffers or are there just thoughts about suffering (being uncomfortable)?

They are just thoughts about suffering, about being uncomfortable.

What is discomfort without thought content?

Discomfort is just sensation without content, without label.

Who/what is there to believe/not believe stuff?

There is no one or no-thing to believe or not believe stuff. There is just a chain of thoughts.

Is there a separation, to start with?

There is no separation, there are thoughts of separation.

Is there someone separate from life, waiting to wake up to reality?

There is a silence when looking for the someone, energy is felt, but no one to be found.

Is there a self or me here, who is separate and isolated from what is, from reality, and thus is in need to understand reality?

There is a thought and sensation of me or self, but when observed/look is not what appears to be. The appearance of self or me is not separated from what is, from reality. Need to understand is also a thought.

What is it that is separate from what is, and trying to figure out how things are?

It is a thought of me and sensation that seems separate from what is and thoughts of trying to figure out how things are.

Or letting go happens on its own effortlessly, when the futility of trying to grasp what is with thoughts is recognized?

Letting go happens on its own effortlessly when the futility of thoughts trying to grasp what is it's recognize.

It is quite remarkable how when seen things as they are, thoughts in particular, the grasping start to loosen.

Thank you very much, these past few days the inquiry keeps gaining momentum!

Love

Deneb

Hi Deneb
All is well, thank you! Hopefully the same with you. How is life these days?

No, they just appear. When there is a chain of thoughts it appears that there is someone having the thoughts but these chains don’t last very long before another unrelated thought comes along. If you haven’t point this out, I normally don’t pay attention to this.

It seems that thought has some logical ordered appearance, but look carefully and just notice if there is an organised sequence. Or is it just another thought that says ‘these thoughts are in sequence’ or “they take content from previous thought”, or that "one thought follows another thought"?

Are you the narrator or the one that listens to the narration?

The one that listens to the narration.

What does the listener look like? Does it have ears?

What makes thoughts yours?

The me feeling combine with the I though create the illusion of thoughts being mine. But they are only sensation and thought.

What is a me-feeling? Is it personal? What makes the sensation yours? There is aliveness/being, but is it personal? Is it a being or just being?

Thoughts have a certain characteristic that seems to be my voice, like the previous question a narrator kind of feeling.

Remember “feels like” and “seems like” exist only in thought content. In DE things are either there or not. So what is “narrator kind of feeling”? Is there in DE?

No they come so fast and spontaneously that it is impossible to record them and play back in order to hear them.

Is it just their speed that prevents them from being recorded? Do they actually make a sound?

There is a thought and sensation of me or self, but when observed/look is not what appears to be.

What is a sensation of me/self? Does the sensation sense an entity? Describe the sensation of self, please…

The appearance of self or me is not separated from what is, from reality. Need to understand is also a thought.

What is the appearance of self? Do you mean the body? Again is this YOUR “body” or just a “body”? If “me”/”I” is a thought how can a thought have a body? Do you mean seeing/colours labelled “body”? Can colours be isolated from seeing? The separation is an illusion created by labelling the different colours into things, but it’s all seeing…
Can you see that?

It is quite remarkable how when seen things as they are, thoughts in particular, the grasping start to loosen.

Is there really grasping? What is there to grasp? Noticing of thoughts happen and noticing of thought content happens. It’s all THIS ;) Next time you watch a movie, notice how you get sucked into the story; how emotions come up and judgements appear. Then all of a sudden, there is like a flip back to the room - as if focus zooms out. Observe how it happens. At which point is there a decision to snap out? Is there one that makes that decision or does it simply happen, effortlessly? Is it different from being sucked into mind movies/ getting lost in thought? If there is nobody to believe, is ”believing in the story” actually happening or is it a story about “believing in the story” (more thought content)?

Do you remember when you learned how to ride a bicycle? At first, you couldn't ride it. Then, there a was a moment when you suddenly succeeded in riding it. Then for the first two or three rides it might have been a bit awkward. Then, it becomes so natural that you don't care about how to ride it anymore. You simply ride it, and it's indeed simple! It's the same with noticing of thought content and its empty nature :)
Love
Rali