The Gate

Hi Henri, we've been busy with house guests, please pardon my tardy response.

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?

Considering the two drinks, iced tea and lemonade, their respective qualities arose as thoughts and as distinct sensations in my mouth. Subtle preferences for, and distinctions between, each arose.

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?

Actually, while counting a strong preference for the lemonade arose.

Did you directly experience a mental function or faculty doing the ‘choosing’? Have you seen this function in action?

The choosing clearly took place, but it arose instantly out of nothing, no one, not even thought, seemed to be involved.

In step 3 where you made a choice, did you actually witness or directly experience a mental function or faculty doing the ‘choosing’? Did anything arise that announced, ‘I am the chooser’? If so, what does this function look like?

No, this was a spontaneous occurrence.

Sometimes we describe this sense of choosing as a ‘feeling’: It feels like ‘I’ did the 'choosing’. But the question is, can a feeling ‘choose’? Is it in the nature of a feeling to 'choose’?

While considering each drink their distinctive qualities were recognized and unique sensations were associated with each. While counting a strong preference spontaneously arose and when I finished counting I took a sip of the lemonade. This sequence of things – thoughts, sensations, counting, taking a sip all happened, arose from nothing, dissolved into nothing. Choosing happened only as an idea. There was no 'act of choosing', it was a spontaneous occurrence without an 'actor' doing the choosing.

Hi Henri, we've been busy with house guests, please pardon my tardy response.

The pardon has been granted. :-)

While considering each drink their distinctive qualities were recognized and unique sensations were associated with each. While counting a strong preference spontaneously arose and when I finished counting I took a sip of the lemonade. This sequence of things – thoughts, sensations, counting, taking a sip all happened, arose from nothing, dissolved into nothing. Choosing happened only as an idea. There was no 'act of choosing', it was a spontaneous occurrence without an 'actor' doing the choosing.

Very nice.

Next I'd like you to take the spirit of the drinks exercise into your everyday life.

So when you get out of bed, get up from a chair, food is chosen, and so on; pay attention if there is an actor anywhere.

There is no agent that can decide how often remembering to do this happens, so let's see how it unfolds.

Let me know if you have questions!

How are things going?

Still busy with guests?

Hi Henri, this has been a very busy week and I did a day long zazenkai yesterday. I think of sitting down to write you everyday and then it gets away from me. Another engagement today, but will try to gather my thoughts and write more later, or tomorrow morning. Thank you for your guidance and your patience.

Understood. Thanks for keeping me updated!

Hi Henri, I'm involved in an ongoing investigation with you to repeatedly get to places where the habitual experience of the 'me sense' is subverted. Look at points of choosing, is there anyone making the choices? No. This thought that occupies the mind now, is there a self creating, guiding, controlling the thought? No. Do the investigation over and over, see that there is no 'me' supporting or controlling thoughts and choices. Over this last couple of weeks flip-flopping between investigating/seeing the no-self and being caught up in thoughts/reactions/daydreaming has seemed more intense. The thought to do the investigation hasn't been arising as often or as clearly.

For most of my life I was very emotionally reactive, easily triggered and quite emotionally explosive. In 2015 I began an intense therapeutic journey involving psychotherapy, daily meditation, and judicious use of psychedelics. It became obvious (even to my wife!) that fundamental change was taking place. The big emotional reactions have nearly disappeared. But, this week, I found myself going down an emotional rabbit hole about a situation that I'm involved with. Long winding ruminations keep the mind spinning. No big emotional outbursts, but the attendant mind-spinning has been going on. The investigation just doesn't seem to emerge, or when it does it isn't very productive. I'm distracted. And, I can see that 'distracted' is a kind of mind-activity happening without some sort of self supporting it.

Is this headway? Or, is this the illusion of self asserting itself against annihilation?

For most of my life I was very emotionally reactive, easily triggered and quite emotionally explosive. In 2015 I began an intense therapeutic journey involving psychotherapy, daily meditation, and judicious use of psychedelics. It became obvious (even to my wife!) that fundamental change was taking place. The big emotional reactions have nearly disappeared. But, this week, I found myself going down an emotional rabbit hole about a situation that I'm involved with. Long winding ruminations keep the mind spinning. No big emotional outbursts, but the attendant mind-spinning has been going on. The investigation just doesn't seem to emerge, or when it does it isn't very productive. I'm distracted. And, I can see that 'distracted' is a kind of mind-activity happening without some sort of self supporting it.

Is this headway? Or, is this the illusion of self asserting itself against annihilation?

Reactivity is explored after the separate self. The more layers of the illusion that drop away, the more the protections of shadow material bubbles up, so it would be normal that as the separate self illusion weakens, stuff would come up.

Then there is also any issues and trauma of the past that would need to be looked into. That is separate from awakening inquiry. Or rather, it is not addressed in awakening, yet it almost always comes up as more layers are peeled away.

The separate self is simply about: Is there a doer, witness, thinker, feeler, decider, manager of life?

Is there someone having these emotional outbursts? Are 'you' in control of them?

Can you stop them? Can you stop the long winding ruminations?

Can you say with 100% certainty that there is no inherent self, and never was?

Hi Henri, thanks for this discerning response.

Reactivity is explored after the separate self. The more layers of the illusion that drop away, the more the protections of shadow material bubbles up, so it would be normal that as the separate self illusion weakens, stuff would come up.

Interestingly, I am slowly reading Ilona's book before going to sleep at night. After writing you yesterday about distraction I read her section on just that. It does seem that material is bubbling up in response to the investigation.

Then there is also any issues and trauma of the past that would need to be looked into. That is separate from awakening inquiry. Or rather, it is not addressed in awakening, yet it almost always comes up as more layers are peeled away.

It's become a bit of a cliche these days to ascribe so much of experience to trauma. But, this mind/body organism, this person (not self), was formed by experiences, and some were challenging. In some ways much of this has been resolved. And, in light of the knowledge of no self, the trauma does seem more like habitual patterns of thoughts and actions/reactions.

The separate self is simply about: Is there a doer, witness, thinker, feeler, decider, manager of life?

Now, with some sense that no self is real, is it just a matter of continuing the self-inquiry – Is there a doer, witness, thinker, feeler, decider, manager of life?

Is there someone having these emotional outbursts? Are 'you' in control of them?

As mentioned, not much outbursting these days, but can still go down the triggered rabbit hole. I was able to investigate while it was going on last week and had glimpses of the emptiness, the no self, the no controller underneath it all.

Can you stop them? Can you stop the long winding ruminations?

Pretty clearly there is no one to stop them. But, not always able to allow them with neutrality, with acceptance.

Can you say with 100% certainty that there is no inherent self, and never was?

I can say it as an intellectual certainty based on repeated experiences through happenstance and investigation. I had a very open sit this morning. Meditating in open awareness without a me, just thoughts arising and dissolving, sounds coming and going, just an unfolding of life. That openness persists to greater and lesser extents. But, is no-self a living reality unencumbered by a subtle me-sense? Not sure.

It's become a bit of a cliche these days to ascribe so much of experience to trauma. But, this mind/body organism, this person (not self), was formed by experiences, and some were challenging. In some ways much of this has been resolved. And, in light of the knowledge of no self, the trauma does seem more like habitual patterns of thoughts and actions/reactions.

I agree that it tends to be overused. Whatever you want to call it, when there is emotional charge, there is often reactivity, because the mind/body seems to need to protect against that. We can explore this as it comes up.

Now, with some sense that no self is real, is it just a matter of continuing the self-inquiry – Is there a doer, witness, thinker, feeler, decider, manager of life?

Yes, the inquiry continues by itself, does it not?

And there is not really a thing called no self, like there is not a no Santa Claus. A nitpick, but that is my job here ;-)

As mentioned, not much outbursting these days, but can still go down the triggered rabbit hole. I was able to investigate while it was going on last week and had glimpses of the emptiness, the no self, the no controller underneath it all.

Sounds good!

But, not always able to allow them with neutrality, with acceptance.

This allowing with neutrality or not, is there control over even this?

I can say it as an intellectual certainty based on repeated experiences through happenstance and investigation. I had a very open sit this morning. Meditating in open awareness without a me, just thoughts arising and dissolving, sounds coming and going, just an unfolding of life. That openness persists to greater and lesser extents. But, is no-self a living reality unencumbered by a subtle me-sense? Not sure.

What do you expect it to look like when the illusion of self is seen through?

What is the subtle me-sense? (I'm looking for your definition of it, as you understand it)

And there is not really a thing called no self, like there is not a no Santa Claus. A nitpick, but that is my job here ;-)

There seems to be a noticing or recognition (thoughts) about no-self – "Oh, there it is again, that emptiness or absence at the core of me." So, the me-sense arises, thoughts happen, in relationship to no-self. No-self is neither a thought nor a sensation. But it does seem to be apparent by its absence in relationship to the me-sense. There are times, especially now when sitting in meditation, that the emptiness seems present. Thoughts arise, sounds are heard, bodily sensations are registered, but there is no me involved. Some of the thoughts that arise are noticing thoughts, recognizing that the me-sense isn't active. But aren't these noticing/recognizing thoughts aspects of the me-sense?

Some of the thoughts that arise are noticing thoughts, recognizing that the me-sense isn't active. But aren't these noticing/recognizing thoughts aspects of the me-sense?

Since the me-sense doesn't exist in the first place, does it have aspects?

They are thoughts arising and passing away. Maybe they comment on 'me', but that doesn't matter. There is no need for anything to change when the self illusion is seen through.

There can be thoughts that say "I am doing this," but that's unimportant. What's important is if it is recognized that there is no inherent self.

Even words that express "Oh, I hate that" can come out, but that is simply what is happening. It's the play of life, if you want to get a bit poetic.

Having said that, it may be that these thoughts fall away with time if they are no longer needed or energized.

Like Ilona's Falling video, there are old programs that come up for review that are dropped.

I'll repeat this question in case it prompts something else: What do you expect it to look like when the illusion of self is seen through?

What do you expect it to look like when the illusion of self is seen through?

Henri, this is an interesting question because the word 'expect' implies a future happening. It seems to have already been seen through. The 'openness/emptiness' that dawned on June 7th is generally available and often noticed. There is 'nothing' to it. Lots of thoughts arise around past expectations and speculations of what no-self would be like, and if this simple emptiness is that. The question, "There must must be more to it than this?" hovers around the periphery of awareness. But, this simple emptiness as the basis of thought, feeling, and sensation, does seem to be enough. At times the doubting comes to the fore and colors the mind activity. But that is just mind activity. You've said that there is a kind of falling process, a period of adjustment, and I sense that is happening. The inquiry and investigation continues. I very much appreciate your guidance as this continues. Does something else happen, or does the doubting fade away?

Henri, this is an interesting question because the word 'expect' implies a future happening. It seems to have already been seen through.

Another way of putting it would be that there is a sense that something is missing, like you mentioned the doubting. It could be a quiet "But this isn't..." That would be an expectation.

The inquiry and investigation continues. I very much appreciate your guidance as this continues. Does something else happen, or does the doubting fade away?

Yes, the inquiry often continues. This falling away of the illusion of self is the beginning. When we wrap up this process, I can give you some resources for further exploration if that is of interest to you.

The doubt tends to lessen as this 'deepens'. The doubt often also has emotional undertone. Meaning, the doubt is a way to avoid primary sensations. Here too I can give you resources to explore.

To begin wrapping things up: Can you say with 100% certainty that there is no separate self, controller, thinker, feeler?

To begin wrapping things up: Can you say with 100% certainty that there is no separate self, controller, thinker, feeler?

Hi Henri, sounds so ominous 'wrapping things up'. This process of getting to clarity about no-self started in 1998 with a question that Ramesh Balsekar posed in an article I read about him. He asked (I paraphrase), "Do you know what the next thought is that's going to come into your mind? If not, then how can you feel that you are in control of your life?" This flattened me. For a couple of weeks my life seemed to make a fundamental shift around those questions. Now, 25 years later, I can say with certainty that there is no separate self, controller, thinker, or feeler. Doubts arise, ruminations happen, feelings can be engulfing, but it all rides on an emptiness in which no abiding self reigns.

I do hope that this isn't the end of your guidance. I suspect there's more clarity to be developed around this. I can see through the glass, but the glass could be cleaner.

I do hope that this isn't the end of your guidance. I suspect there's more clarity to be developed around this. I can see through the glass, but the glass could be cleaner.

It would be the end of the guidance here in the forum, yes.

There are plenty of resources and groups though for deeper glass cleaning, and you can always stay in touch via forum PM or email, but I wouldn't be guiding you on an almost daily basis like here.

A few questions:

When you say that the glass could be cleaner, what is it that you're looking for?

What do you expect will happen that hasn't already happened?

What is it that you don't have to feel or face any longer when the glass is fully cleaned?