The Gate

Hi Alex,

The recommendation to get a notebook is about using it for the exercises, so that you don't need to give verbal vomit in the LU response, but first make some notes as you do the exercise, and then afterwards respond, having considered and reflected. The idea is not to write down every thought whenever one arrives: of course this would be impossible!

An example: you wrote:-

As soon as I relax a bit the mind comes up with questions:
when will this be permanent?
How can I be sure it is not just another thought-loop like the self itself?
Is it possible that this is not what other liberated were talking about?
What if the IN is just some autistic reaction of the mind who creates a non-identity after the identity crashed?
This damned need to explain is a huge resistance because THIS cannot be explained using rational thought.

Noticed (and noted) as:-
"The thought: 'when will this be permanent?'"
"The thought: 'how can I be sure it is not just another thought-loop like the self itself?'"
"The question: 'is it possible that this is not what other liberated were talking about?'"
...
"The thought: 'this cannot be explained using rational thought"'.
"The sense of the need to explain being a huge resistance."
etc etc

It is as though viewing the thoughts as trains coming in and out of the station, and identifying each train, it's claimed destination, it's description etc. but without the need get onto the train. The train can come, the train can go.

So the recommendation to use a notebook is to help orderly consideration. If you can do this with another means that's fine. If not, please get the notebook. Let me know.

I look forward to hearing from you once you have given some time to the exercises.

As I said before: sensations, sensations, observations, observations. Like a child.

Cheers

Mark

Hi Mark.
The time you are giving me is invaluable. Thank you.

I took an hour to go deeper on your last questions.
Some considerations about the experience: I don't like anymore this "observation" of thoughts, this meditation to look at the train without being transported by it. I feel like I'm going back to a way already abandoned. I feel the effort, while being just HERE is far easier and effortless. Of course the HERE state is not permanent and I can be brought away easily by the train of thoughts.
Again, it is disturbing the need to stop to remember or write down what I will write you later after some editing.

As the internal voice subsides the energy-flow feeling in the body increases. Senses become mixed together and touch is by far the more powerful.
I don't really know if the voice really disappears: there is this "body rumbling", a kind of internal noise, loud. It is the noise of body sensations free to be perceived. It is very clear that this "noise" is always there but it is usually filtered and passes unnoted. The general feeling is of peace, no need to do anything, no need to think anything, acceptance. In this state there is not obsessions to drive you, not even when my sick daughter is sleeping a troubled sleep close to me.

It is easy to note thoughts ("this thought was about...") and be brought away by them. Easy enough to be back IN, at least for another few seconds. It is like I cannot forget what I found. It is impressive how fast it is to go back to IN and how tricky are thoughts to take you OUT. There is a kind of pleasure to go OUT, like smoking: you know it is harmful, but you do it anyway.

Thoughts are mostly planning ("I must remember that..."), a few complains, some fantasies. As soon as they are seen as thoughts, they are no more. Between a thought and the next there is apparently nothing, usually interrupted ba a comment such as "No thoughts coming" (a thought itself) and then the rollcoaster begins again.

B. I invite you once more to sense each sense in turn. Then suggest 'could this be IT?'

Each unfiltered sensation IS IT. Each thought or classification/label IS NOT IT. There is no doubt about this. Even if nothing change it is very easy to tell apart IN and OUT. OUT is just IN (always present) plus a load of mind shit.
When IN, sensations are no more single ("I hear a noise, I touch fabric") but in groups: noises are "ambient noise" and not split apart; the body weight, heat, touch are perceived all together at the same time. It is what I have been looking for years during Vipassana meditation and it is very easy indeed to be experienced now, even when I'm OUT.

D. When you take the labels, 'observer', 'witness' and any label that is presenting about the 'participation', when you take these words away, what is left of these experiences other than just life happening in all these apparent experiences and sensations?

Rationalizing I understand it is absurd to remove the labels. I believe I would be delusional if I do.
Leaving the mind apart for a moment (it is difficult to write without some rationalizazion) I would say there are the experiences alone and a body which perceives sensations and react to them in an autonomous way. Alex is completely not necessary. While intellectually "I" feel hurted to think "I" am no more necessary, when I'm IN there is a feeling of lightness and at the same time of activity, without unuseful thought-weight.

Mark, how can you describe how you feel without rationalizing it? Even words are not good enough. I told about my problems with English nuances, while the same problem is even in trying to describe in my mothertongue...

To be honest, every time I write you I would love to read in your answer "you are there!".
Damned mind.

I will go deeper.
Nice day
Alex

Hi Alex

every time I write you I would love to read in your answer "you are there!"

Why will this never happen?

Cheers

Mark

every time I write you I would love to read in your answer "you are there!"

Why will this never happen?

I wrote this (even if I know it is absurd to search for reassurance) because I have this refrain in the head every time I write you.
I am happy you didn't begin to write in every post "YOU doesn't exist. YOU doesn't exist" as a mantra. In that case I would be afraid to be pushed to believe it instead of experiencing it. I read so many posts with this "YOU doesn't exist"!
At the same time I believed (note the past here) that till you don't write "YOU doesn't exist and never did" I am far from the target, that this "YOU doesn't exist" is a signpost to tell the gate is behind the corner.
That's the damage I mentioned about reading prematurely Gateless Gatecrashers, Brutal Beginnings and similar books. They change your point of view but, at least in my case, bring a lot of expectations...

Back to your question, you will never tell me for a number of reasons.
My mind would answer that you never did because you are in a way disappointed by my answers, but this is not the truth.

First reason: I already experienced what it means to be THERE.
I already am THERE. And I've always been THERE, there is no doubt.
The process needs a lot of stabilization but I already know what it means to be THERE.
I don't need you to tell me how to get THERE but to help me remove my mind myopia with your questions. I need to see what's behind this mind fog.
By the way, THERE is not a far away place to reach, just a change of perspective on what is already, here and now. I cannot find another paragon without using a location image. It is just a matter of speaking.

A second reason is that you will never make the mistake to sustain this damned need to classify reality of my mind. My mind needs reassurance, a hug from a pal who knows what I am trough. It needs to be sure you are a guru, somebody already arrived, that you really know what you are talking about.
Funny enough, you NEVER told me what to expect, and I hope you will never do. You just made questions about what I assumed to be sure of (and crashed all with them).

My mind doesn't trust my own body's sensations. Mind arrogance and supposition is huge.
The explanations I need are meant to reassure me I am doing a good job. I need to be sure I'm not following a fake target once more. But it is a reassurance you cannot give me and nobody else can.

A third reason is that it is my experience only and you can do nothing about it.
I only did/will understand IF and WHEN.
Your task is not to guide me along YOUR safe paved way.

It is not necessary to comment. I am full conscious it is due to mind rumblings and not worth a second read.

Thank you.
Alex

Hi Alex,

1. Interesting reading 'reasons one, two and three' but there is a much more fundamental reason (which, interestingly, you hinted at at the beginning of what you wrote).

??

2. When you read what I wrote on 7th April: "Sounds like Life is in and out of 'a sense of Alex' there."
What do you understand by that?
Does Life have any preference between being 'in a sense of an Alex' and having 'no sense of Alex'? Consider.

Cheers

Mark

PS I hope you are not just trotting off mental answers in your tea-break at work... but giving these questions real time to consider and allow the answers to come by themselves without mental engineering.

ps... and pleeeeeease, don't answer them on top of a double espresso :-)

x

Mark,
I'm not writing on top of a double espresso.
What makes you think so? Too long? Overexcited?

Sometimes I write in the (relative) calm of my home, sometimes from the office at lunch time or taking long pauses. Sometimes I post a text that I wrote at home and then saved for further editing.
Anyway I assume I'm not trotting off mental answers.

As I wrote you I am often surprised about what "my hands" write. I read a sentence, wait for a few seconds and they start. There is not a voice dictating. I am not really "thinking" as I would do if I wanted to submit a thesis, excuse myself or convince somebody. Far from it.
It is a sort of automatic writing. Often what comes out is a list of unsorted comments and some cut and paste is necessary. Some editing is also necessary to remove garbage, mostly excuses. This point is a possible signature of mind control behind the hands.

At the moment it is the best I can come up when you ask for answers that "come by themselves without mental engineering". If you suggest to skip this first foam I can try to do it.

1. Interesting reading 'reasons one, two and three' but there is a much more fundamental reason

The real reason is so basic that I forgot to number it: I want to experience it, not to believe it just because you told me.

"Sounds like Life is in and out of 'a sense of Alex' there."

NO, life is always there. The only difference is being IN or OUT from noting it.
When IN, the sense of an Alex is completely useless. There is the experience alone. Alex disappears together with the internal voice (I want to go deeper here because the two are always together, perhaps faces of the same coin).
When OUT, life is also there but "sense of Alex" is dominant and too busy to note it.

Aliveness is subtle. If you don't put attention it can be hidden behind any thought.
If a thought about my daughter comes up, all aliveness is there but covered by this thought. At the moment even thought of minimal interest ("I will pick something to eat") is enough to stop from being IN.
"Alex" in this phase can hide easily all aliveness in my body. This doesn't mean there is not aliveness.

Life doesn't have any preference. It is, independently by the fact there is a witness or not. It is life who keeps a body going on, acting and reacting, not the witness (whatever it is) nor Alex.

Cheers
Alex

Hi dear Alex,

1. Even more fundamental than all of those. Staring in the face, day and night. Let the answer come and find you.

2. I never mentioned the word 'witness'. Does life have a preference between being in a sense of Alex, and not being in a sense of Alex? Does life have a preference between whether Alex is plagued by thoughts about how to find the answer, or whether Alex has given up?

STOP. Let it come.

Cheers

Mark

PS soon we will find those two words written on the door, remember? ;-)

Hi Mark.
Waiting for (non-mental) answers is evidently not my style.

Today's session, almost one hour, gave nothing but body sensations.
I sit there feeling everything, labelling toughts (not so many). Repeating some times your questions and waiting for answers.

Your questions are very precise (they request a definite answer, not just a skin shiver). It is possible I have the wrong idea about what to expect.
Is it something I need to get on my own (not only the answer but also the form this answer will take), or can you be more specific providing an example?

1. Even more fundamental than all of those. Staring in the face, day and night.

Veeeery cryptic. I don't even understand if I got it in my last answer or you mean there is something else I'm missing.

PS soon we will find those two words written on the door, remember?

No, I didn't remember. I had to check the posts to understand what you mean. :-O
It looks like I need to take more care of words.

Thank you!
Nice day
Alessandro

Hi Alex,

First to clarify a few things from points you have raised over the last couple of days. I hope that you will find these helpful.

From your first post 10th April:

Mark, how can you describe how you feel without rationalizing it? Even words are not good enough.

Words are all we have here (and maybe some energy). Words label, of course, they represent the things we are writing about. We can describe it all without rationalising. We identify what we are feeling, sensing, even thoughts - but this does not mean rationalising it. Rationalising is more about reasoning about it, intellectualising, trying to calculate 'this therefore that' etc. We are really interested here in the honest, considered responses. ie not intellectualised, but not rushed. I hope that makes sense.

From your third post 10th April:

Anyway I assume I'm not trotting off mental answers.

As I wrote you I am often surprised about what "my hands" write. I read a sentence, wait for a few seconds and they start. There is not a voice dictating. I am not really "thinking" as I would do if I wanted to submit a thesis, excuse myself or convince somebody. Far from it.
It is a sort of automatic writing. Often what comes out is a list of unsorted comments and some cut and paste is necessary. Some editing is also necessary to remove garbage, mostly excuses. This point is a possible signature of mind control behind the hands.
At the moment it is the best I can come up when you ask for answers that "come by themselves without mental engineering". If you suggest to skip this first foam I can try to do it.

When you read a question, look deeply into what is being asked or directed. Don't send back the first thing which occurs, like a reflex (ie your first emotional response, or head response). Stay with the question. Leave a space for Life to do its work. If you have been asked about sensations, or what feels real, stay with those.. and really really look, asking yourself 'what feels real here?'. Once you have a sense of that, then respond honestly.

Please re-read points 3 and 4 in our original agreement. These should help to clarify also.

From your second post 10th April (and since):

every time I write you I would love to read in your answer "you are there!"

Why will this never happen?

When you wrote that statement you gave yourself a zen koan. Yes, there is something else, the most fundamental answer to that question, which is not touched on in your answers 1, 2, 3 or 4. Don't worry, we can come back to it later.

From your last post:

PS soon we will find those two words written on the door, remember?

No, I didn't remember. I had to check the posts to understand what you mean. :-O
It looks like I need to take more care of words.

Yes, please take care with words and read carefully. It is the mind which plays tricks with us, not Life. Also, there is no attempt to send you trick questions here, Alex. Promise. :-)

OK that was the clarification part.

Now a question: Is there any real individual called 'Alex' there in any way shape or form? If so, how is that felt, how is that known? Look deeply and tell me what comes up.

Cheers

Mark

Mark, thank you very much for your answer. It is very useful.
Today the day has been very demanding and I didn't reserve a formal time for a stop.
I just tried a number of times during the day to spot Alex somewhere during my activities, but apart the simple thought "I'm in control" I could not find a single action where an Alex was necessary.

Now with the "new" instructions all is very clear indeed. I will comment properly as soon as it is possible.
Thank you very much. I look forward to find some more time to go deeper.
Nice evening
Alex

Sunday, nothing new to note.
During the day I gave some attention to who is in charge, but the only answers I got are surely mental.
When they are removed my posts are short.

A great resistance: a recurrent thought whenever I stop recites "Even if you cannot find Alex, it doesn't mean he doesn't exist. You can never be sure." I believe I heard it dozens of times today.

Any hint to overcome this, any idea is welcome.
Thank you
Alex

Hi Alex,

Both posts noted, thanks. I have some family staying for a few days until Friday, so please bear with me if my responses take just a little longer than usual.

Cheers

Mark

Mark,
Take your time.
I've plenty to do with what you already gave me in the last week...

Have a nice day
Alessandro

Hi Alex

Again, let's not confuse thoughts (ideas) and thinking (rationalising).
Thoughts are not proofs, they are thoughts. Do you believe the thoughts? How do you test their validity?

Say, someone makes the claim 'there is no chair in the room'. How can you test the claim? What is the mechanism you will use?
Say, they make the claim 'there is no polar bear in the room'. How can you test this one? Which faculties will be helpful here?
Say, they make the claim 'there is an Alex in the room'. How can you test this? What kinds of evidence can be found either way?

Cheers

Mark