The Gate

I think it would be better to start here:

1. Try to proof that a self exists.
   • So see if you can come up with a proof that a self exists.
     Suppose I'm totally wrong and it does really exists. I'm open to logical argumentation. Convince me.

A "real" self has been created in this organism's thoughts. It is "real" because the reactions to the belief in it are real. So from this experiential point of view, there is a controller.

A "real" self has been created in this organism's thoughts. It is "real" because the reactions to the belief in it are real. So from this experiential point of view, there is a controller.

Very good.

Why do you put "real" between quotes?

A controller is being experienced - What is the nature of this controller? Is it really in control? Is it you?

Please give one (or more) example(s) of a situation where you reacted according to the belief in a real self.
How did the belief influence the event(s)?

Why do you put "real" between quotes?

Maybe the self can only be conditioned.

A controller is being experienced - What is the nature of this controller?

It is founded upon the belief that there is control, so there are reactions to this belief. This results in a "controller."

Is it really in control?

Yes.

Is it you?

Yes.

Please give one (or more) example(s) of a situation where you reacted according to the belief in a real self. How did the belief influence the event(s)?

Hoping someone would not think of me a certain way. The belief made the event happen.

, so there are reactions to this belief.

This includes doing, thinking, etc.

I sent you a reply a few days ago, and because I didn't hear from you, I just checked and see that my reply wasn't added to the thread. So I'll write it again.

I think it would be better to start here:
Try to proof that a self exists.

You can do both, also investigate: What is it not? What am I not?
(body, thoughts, feelings, sense of self)
And remember: What you see you can not be

I want you to investigate all your I-thoughts, “I should/would/could ...”-thoughts and also monitor and list fears/worries and desires. Write down as many as you can. Try also to get the more volatile feelings and thoughts into words. It would be good to dedicate a special notebook just for this.

How is that going?
The reason I want you to look inside is because your believe in a I-structure/personality is attached to many beliefs, attitudes and behaviours, so it is “heavy loaded”. If you expect many presents from Santa Claus, it is harder to give up the belief, even if you have already recognized him as uncle John.

Why do you put "real" between quotes?

Maybe the self can only be conditioned.

I don't understand this, please explain.

A controller is being experienced - What is the nature of this controller?

It is founded upon the belief that there is control, so there are reactions to this belief. This results in a "controller."

Is it really in control?

Yes.

Is it you?

Yes.

So the reactions to the belief that there is control are in control, and that is you, the controller?

Please give one (or more) example(s) of a situation where you reacted according to the belief in a real self. How did the belief influence the event(s)?

Hoping someone would not think of me a certain way. The belief made the event happen.

Do you really believe that?

You don't think this process (LU) will work for you, and I don't think either and it is because I sense that you are not "ripe". If you read other threads of people who did see through the illusion of self, especially the short ones, you can see that they were “burning for truth” and most of them had searched a lot and tried many different ways.
It is also true that none of that is necessary. Seeing that there is no self is an open secret. It is available to anybody at any moment. Yet it is rare to happen to someone who never wondered “who am I?” or went into spiritual practises like meditation or visiting a guru.
It is also very possible that when the insight is there it has no impact at all: “OK, there is no self. So what?”

The difficulty is that it is so utterly simple:
Look at a chair. Do you see the chair?
Look inside Ali. Do you see a self?

You can do both, also investigate: What is it not? What am I not?
(body, thoughts, feelings, sense of self)

I have done countless variations of this. These types of questions feel indirect, because they are more about thinking rather than seeing. (at least for me)

Please give one (or more) example(s) of a situation where you reacted according to the belief in a real self. How did the belief influence the event(s)?

Hoping someone would not think of me a certain way. The belief made the event happen.

Do you really believe that?

I don't know, this is theorizing.

And remember: What you see you can not be

Seeing is a function of the organism.

So then I am the organism or a function of it.

I want you to investigate all your I-thoughts, “I should/would/could ...”-thoughts and also monitor and list fears/worries and desires. Write down as many as you can. Try also to get the more volatile feelings and thoughts into words. It would be good to dedicate a special notebook just for this.

How is that going?

In some parts I feel like a vastly changed person compared to one or more years ago.

I don't understand this, please explain.

If the self belief is not imposed upon an organism by others then there is no self.

So the reactions to the belief that there is control are in control, and that is you, the controller?

Yes, but this is not on the periphery anymore. I may seem inconsistent at times, that is because the way the self is viewed changes. This did go along something like this:

When is something an illusion, when is it real?

When it is believed in or not recognized as an illusion. (experientially)

The difference between the self belief and the Santa belief is that the self simply exists, or something along the lines of that.


I feel the self consists of thoughts + control, and I would like to be directed in seeing why this is not the case.

Look at a chair. Do you see the chair?

Yes

Look inside Ali. Do you see a self?

No.

There is no self that is seen/experienced, but there is a self that is thinking and controlling experience.

You can do both, also investigate: What is it not? What am I not?
(body, thoughts, feelings, sense of self)

I have done countless variations of this. These types of questions feel indirect, because they are more about thinking rather than seeing. (at least for me)

These questions can't be solved with thinking. You have to look and discriminate. Are you the body? Look.
Are you thoughts? Look. What is this "sense of self"? Investigate. Not by thinking or analyzing but by introspection. Feel this sense of self. Keep your attention on it during the day and see what happens. Did you ever try that?

Please give one (or more) example(s) of a situation where you reacted according to the belief in a real self. How did the belief influence the event(s)?

Hoping someone would not think of me a certain way. The belief made the event happen.

Do you really believe that?

I don't know, this is theorizing.

Yes, it is. So let's cut that crap.

And remember: What you see you can not be

Seeing is a function of the organism.

Yes.

So then I am the organism.

That is how we use the word "I". As a pointer to "this organism".

or a function of it.

Also, because the thought "I" arises in the organism.

I want you to investigate all your I-thoughts, “I should/would/could ...”-thoughts and also monitor and list fears/worries and desires. Write down as many as you can. Try also to get the more volatile feelings and thoughts into words. It would be good to dedicate a special notebook just for this.

How is that going? How many thoughts/worries/desires did you find? Can you mention some?
Do you understand the usefulness of this?

If the self belief is not imposed upon an organism by others then there is no self.

Yes, great insight.

So the reactions to the belief that there is control are in control, and that is you, the controller?

Yes, but this is not on the periphery anymore. I may seem inconsistent at times, that is because the way the self is viewed changes.

I don't have a clue what you are trying to convey here. It's complicated and I see circular reasoning.
So how is the self viewed now?

The difference between the self belief and the Santa belief is that the self simply exists, or something along the lines of that.

You're joking, no?

I feel the self consists of thoughts + control, and I would like to be directed in seeing why this is not the case.

Almost right. The self consists of thoughts + the idea of control.


When the thought "I" is not there, there is no self to be found, which is probably 99% of the time.
Observe the body typing, reading, running, talking and try to catch a moment without thought. A moment with attention, awareness, but without thought.

Look at a chair. Do you see the chair?

Yes

Look inside Ali. Do you see a self?

No.

So that's it. You've seen it. Congratulations.

There is no self that is seen/experienced, but there is a self that is thinking and controlling experience.

That's what you think, but is it true?

Questions to you, the controller:

• Do you know what your next thought will be?
  Can you change your mood into deep sadness or great joy at any moment? Now, for instance?
  When you run, do you do the running or is the body doing it all by itself?

You have to make up your mind about a fundamental issue:
Are you going to continue to believe your thoughts or your direct experience?

These questions can't be solved with thinking. You have to look and discriminate. Are you the body? Look. Are you thoughts? Look. What is this "sense of self"? Investigate. Not by thinking or analyzing but by introspection. Feel this sense of self. Keep your attention on it during the day and see what happens. Did you ever try that?

Yes, I have tried this numerous times.

How is that going? How many thoughts/worries/desires did you find? Can you mention some?

I found many, I will mention a few.

Worries:
Death
Future
No liberation

Desires:
Liberation
Some weight loss

Do you understand the usefulness of this?

No.

So how is the self viewed now?

In the most simplest sense, the controller.

You're joking, no?

No, this is how I experience the self.

The self consists of thoughts + the idea of control

I can decide to tap my fingers to prove the existence of me(the controller), and then do it. This is verifiable evidence of an actual controller.

Now if there isn't really any control, the event above is still produced by the belief in a controller. So the controller might as well be "real."

A moment with attention, awareness, but without thought.

Maybe you mean without the influence of thought?

Do you know what your next thought will be?

No.

Can you change your mood into deep sadness or great joy at any moment? Now, for instance?

No.

When you run, do you do the running or is the body doing it all by itself?

It is impossible to confirm which.

Are you going to continue to believe your thoughts or your direct experience?

It's not as simple as this.

Feel this sense of self. Keep your attention on it during the day and see what happens. Did you ever try that?

Yes, I have tried this numerous times.

And? Results? Insights? Seen what it is, this "sense of self"?

Your worries about the future, did you specify them? How many did you write down?

Do you understand the usefulness of this?(Investigating desires/fears/worries/shoulds)

No.

Around the believe in a separate self a lot of beliefs, attitudes and (internal and external) behaviors have formed, which help to keep this central believe in place. A kind of clutter of "I"deas has formed which are constantly repeated to keep the idea (and feeling) of a separate self in place. By investigating them it can become clear that most of these patterns are not helpful (anymore) and just conditioned reacions. Sometimes the source can reveal itself. Example: I was convinced that I did everything wrong, which originated from my father never showing approval, whatever I tried. I carried that unknowingly around for over 40 years.
In your case I guess that fears as well as expectations are in the way.

So how is the self viewed now?

In the most simplest sense, the controller.

If the self belief is not imposed upon an organism by others then there is no self.

So the controller is imposed on you from outside. So who is in control, then?

No, this is how I experience the self.

How long do you want to go around in this circle?

The self consists of thoughts + the idea of control

I can decide to tap my fingers to prove the existence of me(the controller), and then do it. This is verifiable evidence of an actual controller.

Watch this.

Now if there isn't really any control, the event above is still produced by the belief in a controller. So the controller might as well be "real."

So the controller is real because the controller believes in the controller?

A moment with attention, awareness, but without thought.

Maybe you mean without the influence of thought?

No. Without any thinking happening. Like when you are totally immersed in a video game for example.

There is no self that is seen/experienced, but there is a self that is thinking and controlling experience.

Is that absolutely true or is that a belief?

Do you know what your next thought will be?

No.

Can you change your mood into deep sadness or great joy at any moment? Now, for instance?

No.

Not much of a controller then, eh?

Are you going to continue to believe your thoughts or your direct experience?

It's not as simple as this.

It's even simpler:
Every thought is an experience.
"I" is a thought or part of a thought, So "I" itself can not think. Hence there is no thinker. The thinker is himself a thought. See if you can find a thinker that is not a thought.

There is no choice and there is no-one to make a decision about it anyway. A shift could happen, though. Actually it already happened. Organism Ali looked inside and found no self there. Whining thoughts bubble up from the unability to accept the simplicity of that, trying to cover it up. Maybe because none of your expectations came out? No bliss, no inner peace, no love. Thoughts of superiority/inferiority, fear of what other people think of you, it's all still there. Nothing really changed.

Expectations are often in the way: Something to read.

And? Results? Insights? Seen what it is, this "sense of self"?

There is direct exposure of this, it can't be constantly reinforced by thoughts.
If I focus on the organism("me") there is only a feeling.
So maybe that means me, my past/future, relations etc. is all imagined.

It's very easy to recognize the self as real because this is how we communicate.

I have a habit of abandoning all attempts of seeing.

Your worries about the future, did you specify them? How many did you write down?

I didn't write down much. It's entirely unknown to me, and that is why I am worried.

[quote="Noobstorm]

So how is the self viewed now?

In the most simplest sense, the controller.

If the self belief is not imposed upon an organism by others then there is no self.

So the controller is imposed on you from outside. So who is in control, then?

I was not in control and then I was.

No, this is how I experience the self.

How long do you want to go around in this circle?

I can't not go around in this circle. It will continue to happen until the self is recognized as a false belief.

Watch this.

That feels like passive logic and doesn't seem to help. There is no direct experience of a decision being made six seconds before it's done.

So the controller is real because the controller believes in the controller?

No because a controller is believed in.

There is no self that is seen/experienced, but there is a self that is thinking and controlling experience.

Is that absolutely true or is that a belief?

I don't know.

Not much of a controller then, eh?

I am experienced as a controller. The answers to those questions again feel like passive logic.

"I" is a thought or part of a thought, So "I" itself can not think. Hence there is no thinker. The thinker is himself a thought. See if you can find a thinker that is not a thought.

Feels like passive logic again. I need a more direct approach to this, if that is possible.

No, I can't find a thinker that is not a thought.

Organism Ali looked inside and found no self there. Whining thoughts bubble up from the unability to accept the simplicity of that, trying to cover it up.

No.

Hi Ali,
I am a bit busy, but will reply soon.
Greetz,
Lex.

If I focus on the organism("me") there is only a feeling.

What kind of feeling? Can you describe that feeling? And what is the organism? The body + mind?

So maybe that means me, my past/future, relations etc. is all imagined.

Maybe it is, maybe not. What is sure is that it is indeterminable whether it is or not.

It's very easy to recognize the self as real because this is how we communicate.

Once it is seen as such, "I" is just a pointer to reference back to where the words come from or to the body (e.g. "I'm at home")
The habit to assign reality to what it is pointing at can linger on for a while, so then the realization that there is nothing there has to be renewed. It has to be seen again and again for a while to counteract the habitual belief.
This is so for some people, like me, some people are so clear that the habit is broken instantly.

No, this is how I experience the self.

How long do you want to go around in this circle?

I can't not go around in this circle. It will continue to happen until the self is recognized as a false belief.

Isn't it already? Or is the feedback loop still playing? Or both?

Watch this.

That feels like passive logic and doesn't seem to help. There is no direct experience of a decision being made six seconds before it's done.

Do you see that you refer to logic when it suits you and to direct experience when the latter is more convenient?

There is no self that is seen/experienced, but there is a self that is thinking and controlling experience.

Is that absolutely true or is that a belief?

I don't know.

If you don't know, it means it is a belief. If it was absolutely true, you would know.

Not much of a controller then, eh?

I am experienced as a controller. The answers to those questions again feel like passive logic.

Never heard of passive logic. Is it something you can feel?
Isn't it just another excuse not to see?

"I" is a thought or part of a thought, So "I" itself can not think. Hence there is no thinker. The thinker is himself a thought. See if you can find a thinker that is not a thought.

Feels like passive logic again. I need a more direct approach to this, if that is possible.

Not possible, this is as direct as it can get.
Although it is perfectly logical, it is meant as a pointer to LOOK, not as food for the mind.
Look and see if it is true.

Organism Ali looked inside and found no self there. Whining thoughts bubble up from the unability to accept the simplicity of that, trying to cover it up.

No.

Sometimes I try to provoke you to get you out of your passivity/lethargy. I won't try that again.

No, I can't find a thinker that is not a thought.

Good. So you looked. Great.

A controller is believed in.

Seems to me that your mind is clear enough to have seen and understood everything after almost 40 pages. Something else is blocking the process. I suppose there is fear. Probably the fear of losing control.


This has become quite a long thread. I see that you made some steps towards the gate, you saw that there is no thinker, just thoughts. Next step is to see that control is an illusion, which seems to be a tough one for you.


What has been lingering in my mind is a totally different approach which could work for you and which I like to share, although it is "out of my jurisdiction" as a Liberation Unleashed guide. I feel I am already playing the guru role too much. Yet I'll share my suggestion:

Let go of all self-importance. Ignore Ali's desires and fears and put yourself ruthlessly in service of your environment. Pretend to be unconditional love (fake it until you make it). Give. Become a love-warrior. Forget what others might think of you. Forget about your "image".
Just make sure your willingness is not abused and take care of your body.

I am leaving you to marinate in the process and the initiative to pick up this thread is to you. If there is some revelation, shift or breakthrough in any way, let me now, ok?

Good luck!
Love.

What kind of feeling? Can you describe that feeling? And what is the organism? The body + mind?

It is a feeling of the organism. Sometimes it can change based on things such as anxiety etc.

Yes, that is the organism.

Isn't it already? Or is the feedback loop still playing? Or both?

No, it is not recognized as a false belief and there is no known reason why it should be false.

Does imagination exist? It has ties with reality. The self construct that was created controls this organism.

Do you see that you refer to logic when it suits you and to direct experience when the latter is more convenient?

Yes.

If you don't know, it means it is a belief. If it was absolutely true, you would know.

It feels like it is absolutely true.

My previous answer to this wasn't from experience.

Never heard of passive logic. Is it something you can feel?
Isn't it just another excuse not to see?

No I can't feel it, but it can generate subtle/not so subtle confusion, frustration etc. It is not an excuse not to see.

Good. So you looked. Great.

No, that answer was not from looking.

[quote="lex""]
Seems to me that your mind is clear enough to have seen and understood everything after almost 40 pages. Something else is blocking the process. I suppose there is fear. Probably the fear of losing control.
[/quote]
There is no fear of losing control that I am aware of.

So there is a self(or belief in a self) that loses control?

you saw that there is no thinker, just thoughts.

No.

I am thoughts + control.

If you don't know, it means it is a belief. If it was absolutely true, you would know.

It feels like it is absolutely true.
My previous answer to this wasn't from experience.

Maybe you confuse "direct experience" with "feeling"?
It is quite crucial to understand what is meant by "direct experience".
Direct experience is perception without filtering or interpretation.
Examples: I have a head and brains - not direct experience.
On top of this body there is a space where a visual world is perceived - direct experience.
I have two eyes - not direct experience.
The body consists of muscles, bones, arteries, nerves and organs - not direct experience.
Sensations, thoughts and sensory perceptions occur - direct experience.
There is fear - direct experience.
"I think I understand" - direct experience. (a thought arises/ is experienced/ is perceived)

Did you confuse direct experience with feeling and is it clear now?

If you don't know, it means it is a belief. If it was absolutely true, you would know.

It feels like it is absolutely true.

Truth can't be felt, it is known.

Isn't it already? Or is the feedback loop still playing? Or both?

No, it is not recognized as a false belief and there is no known reason why it should be false.

You've seen that "I" only appears as a thought. That it is a pointer to a body-mind (a.k.a Ali) and not more than that. So what is still believed in? Some central processing unit? Even a computer has nowadays at least four of them and you got billions, they are called neurons (if you still believe in those). So what is this self that is still believed in?

Does imagination exist? It has ties with reality.

That is correct. Reality might very well be imagined.

The self construct that was created controls this organism.

For a part that could be true. It doesn't beat your heart or digests your food, but it probably has a huge impact on your social behavior. That is why it can be so liberating to see it as false. Then it can lose its grip. Gradually or immediately.

Do you see that you refer to logic when it suits you and to direct experience when the latter is more convenient?

Yes.

Ok.

Never heard of passive logic. Is it something you can feel?
Isn't it just another excuse not to see?

No I can't feel it, but it can generate subtle/not so subtle confusion, frustration etc. It is not an excuse not to see.
So, “I feel this is passive logic” is nonsense. You probably think it.

Good. So you looked. Great.

No, that answer was not from looking.

But you saw it. Maybe I should use the term “direct observation”, where “direct” means: without filtering by thinking.

[quote="lex""]
Seems to me that your mind is clear enough to have seen and understood everything after almost 40 pages. Something else is blocking the process. I suppose there is fear. Probably the fear of losing control.

There is no fear of losing control that I am aware of.[/quote]
That's great, because that is a quite common fear in this process.
Any other fears?

you saw that there is no thinker, just thoughts.

No.

O, then who said: “I can't find a thinker that is not a thought.”

I am thoughts + control.

Why not the body and feelings too?
Or the rest of the world?
The universe?
God?

Again: We have a long thread.
I suggest that you reread it and let me know if there are any new revelations, insights.

Did you consider what I suggested about putting yourself in service of the environment? Or is that too radical an exercise? If you really want a change in your life, do it for 10 days. I believe in your case it is more powerful and efficient than this process.