The Gate

Hi Shreyash
Discussion is lot more confusing without the quote function so it might be better to go back here.

Here, the process goes like 1. sensory trigger or thought -> 2. “Unpleasant” physical sensation -> 3. Resistance and reaction to the physical sensation, generally in the form of engaging with or going down the path of a particular story which may or may not result in a “physical world” reaction. 
Quite often, it is only after the 3rd step has already happened that awareness of the process occurs. This is after the ‘gap’ so to speak (but is the opportunity for a new one, the reaction to realization itself).
Is it just with time and practice that one is less often lost in desire/lost in thought, and able to see automatically prior to the reaction? If the reaction has already occurred or the reactive thoughts have begun already, what is there to observe then? Simply observe how those unfold, or let go of them entirely and return to the physical?

So you know what to “do”. If you notice resistance (a story of how things are supposed to be different), that is your "dive in" sign. Resistance should not be avoided, it should be met with curiosity and eagerness to explore. You know that there is nothing “unpleasant” about sensations – they’ve been wronged by a stupid label. All sensations should be felt – that’s why they are there – and they are felt eventually “pleasantly” or “unpleasantly”. So “you” might as well surrender to them ;)
Even if the noticing comes “post factum”, that is one step closer to surrender …You can still check the validity of the story. Conditioning wasn’t built in a day so you can’t really expect to happen overnight. What helps is to always check if a “painful” story or any other story comes even close to DE. The next time the story appears again, there will be a parallel story saying how this is not correct until it finally drops. It will also give an opportunity for a “gap” exploration.

Absolutely. In my case it turns more to a story of victimization - of self-blame and what could I have done different? How could I be different from now on? Etc.

What a story indeed! Can you decide to change “yourself”? What will change what? How? Remember, thoughts self-organise around the experience – so the more noticing DE the more the story changes. Otherwise, THIS is unchangeable - it’s always fresh and unique, but at the same time the same.

It is inaction that is the most ‘difficult’ so to speak. 
But I also notice that it is easy to turn this “embracing loneliness” into a story as well. One that paints myself as someone intentionally isolating from external interaction to get comfortable with solitude (which is currently a tempting thought, as shutting off to the outside is a good way to avoid the pain of seeing what is deemed unpleasant). There is the appearance of the self-improvement story here to - instead of absolute acceptance of what-is , it becomes about disappearing socially and returning after changing the self to avoid future pain or to be seen differently again. At the same time, there is much to be gained from intentionally creating space and being alone. It is a tricky balance to navigate in terms of practical steps so to speak

It's actually not inaction – there is very active exploring of what is actually here. Remember “action” is a story. By “embracing loneliness” I mean actively exploring what is labelled as “loneliness” and what is actually here, not adding another label describing the imaginary character as being lonely. Can THIS be lonely so it needs another THIS? Or is it just a story about “loneliness”? How many THIS's are out there? There are some sensations vilified as “unpleasant” and so much story for checking. And yes everything can become a story, but the story is complementary not primary. Seeing its emptiness, reduces its “intensity”, it makes it even funny. So yes there can be a story about “avoidance” and that is fine as long as you know that stories are just stories (empty) and you give those sensations a chance to become less “unpleasant”.
Is it up to you what will come next? Can you really decide to go and be an ascetic? If it happens it will happen with or without “your” approval and planning, and the story on the side will be “ I decided to do that”, you know that! At this point of my journey, I’ve given up on making long term plans – I know that when the right moment comes the “actions” will present themselves. There is just curiosity which way the story goes :)
You see, “avoidance”/”resistance” and “surrendering” are two opposing stories about the same DE – it still happens only the content of the story is “optional”. There is no stopping what is happening...

There are so many stories that pull and demand engagement that relaxation into uncertainty is the scariest of all.

What? The story doesn’t know what it will “write” next??? Can you change, create or avoid anything? The uncertainty stops being an issue, once you have finally stopped trying to resist what is happening, and stopped trying to change the world to your own liking, when all the story is seen as false and empty. You can do this with all the stories one by one as they come, or just accepting that all stories are empty and whatever they say it just does not correspond to reality. Then whatever comes is OK. There is just curiosity of what’s next.

And this is, spot on, the scariest idea of all. ‘Dropping ideals of who we want to be’, when there is abundance of fanciful notions constructed of an ideal self that can suffer less and live more. 


Are those “ideals”/expectations yours? Or they’ve been given to you? Why even try to restrict yourself (not that you can) to certain ideas, when you can be and you are so much more? The chasing of “ideals” is like a quicksand – it just never ends and it sucks the life out of you. What is it to be “smart” for example? Is there only one opinion on that and is it always the same? Even worse with “beautiful” – beauty is in the eye of the beholder :). The “suffering” is optional and dependant on the story. “Living” longer is a bit more basic (primal) desire and it usually comes with harmless (or sometimes not so much) story of healthy living – diet, exercise, etc. As long as it is not an obsession resulting from fear of death, then there is nothing wrong with it. In Buddhist tradition it is encouraged to live a healthy life as it gives a longer opportunity for exploring :)

Without that idea, there is the fear of directionless-ness, the fear that the deepest desires and longings of connectedness and fulfillment and love will remain unfulfilled if I do not change in a way that is conducive to them. 

 Does one instead explore the aspect that these seemingly “core” desires needn’t be fulfilled at all?
 So when this fear, or any desire to change that is driven by this fear, appears - is it a matter of letting go of it entirely? The thinking, the planning, etc. Since so much of life is structured around “decisions” that were made for solving this fear (including that which may be conventionally “good”, like practices around health and meditation), is letting go of them and surrendering to allow ‘life’ to restructure itself the way ahead?

What is “directionless-ness” in DE? Does it has to do with control? If you stopped thinking about what may happen and paid attention to what is actually happening right here, right now, there wouldn’t be any room for fear; there wouldn’t be any need to protect a an imaginary self from things that may or may not happen.
So, wanting control is just that—wanting/a story. Spontaneous actions are happening, and so is the thought story about trying to be in control and not. In simple everyday life, what is happening is happening. “Decisions” are made, “actions” are taken. Thinking about what needs to be done flow with whatever is happening, describing it. Hands and feet are doing their thing. What is in control of that? What is in control of the weather?
The desire for control over the circumstances and others comes as a result of avoidance of unwanted outcomes and emotions. So explore these, why are they unwanted? What is wrong with them being here really? The end of trying to change what is starts with seeing that the controller is imagined.
Wanting to be loved and accepted are also just wanting/ a story. You think that love and acceptance have to come from someone else, from outside; only then, you imagine, will you be happy and feel loved. But the love you seek is not “out there”. There is no one person out there who can give it to you. And before you rush into new age ideas, check: what are “others” , what is “you”? Can love come from a colour? Is there a difference between a “stranger” and a “loved one” without the thoughts? Love is always here and now, underneath all the sad stories of unfulfilled love. It’s just has to be noticed. The “heart” wants to love freely, openly, and limitlessly. It is the recognition that “everything” is connected, all is one. Love is THIS, surrendering to what IS. It’s only expectations that come in the way of the flow of love, make it conditional and one-sided. Instead of seeing what is lacking, notice what is already here, “allow” life to be :)
Love (the divine in “me” recognises the divine in “you”)
Rali

Hi Rali,

You can still check the validity of the story.

By "checking the validity of the story" and "diving in", do you mean ignoring thought content and exploring the experience on a raw sense level? Or taking the story content at face value and engaging in inquiry/comparison with it? (as you said it can be beneficial to compare the story to DE).
Also, if I engage in this comparison of the story to DE, there is really no comparison xD. There is nothing in DE to compare to, DE is empty of story and analysis, so putting a story, thought or sensation next to DE is like apples to oranges, comparing a fabrication with something that is nothing at all. Though I suppose it is in doing this repeatedly without judging that the story is seen as something apart from what is, and the pull begins to reduce?

The next time the story appears again, there will be a parallel story saying how this is not correct until it finally drops.

True, the story about inquiry and exploration also tends to form. Another gap to witness.

What a story indeed! Can you decide to change “yourself”? What will change what? How?

A lot of story comes up around this answer, since as I mentioned, the "changing myself" or "being seen positively" story is probably the most frequent and weighty one that draws engagement all the time. Though as expected, any "realness" to that story doesn't hold up to direct looking - there isn't anything there to change nor anyone there to change it nor a timeline for it to be changed on. But emotional/sensation content is strong and produces a reaction and subsequently contracts thoughts back into the existing idea of 'self', and then a changer, a final destination, a story, etc.

By “embracing loneliness” I mean actively exploring what is labelled as “loneliness” and what is actually here, not adding another label describing the imaginary character as being lonely.

Hah, true. Another cleaner character being created, because cleaners give the false feeling of certainty, of a set path or a way to "feeling good" about "myself". They satisfy the unease created by the thought of "but what should "I" DO... because "I" clearly don't like what is happening here right now!".
Here it seems both those aspects can be looked at - the desire to feel good inherently, and the "self" that needs to feel good about itself.

Can THIS be lonely so it needs another THIS? Or is it just a story about “loneliness”? How many THIS's are out there?

Well THIS can only feel some sensation that receives a label and story as loneliness. Some thoughts precede that familiar sensation, and in this case generally thoughts about "my" connection with "other" people, so those thoughts get lumped into a recurrent story of loneliness. True that it is a story and nothing real, there is only one THIS that is HERE now.
The THIS cannot be lonely. 'Lonely' is part of THIS. And the thing that is being lonely is also part of THIS (as a thought).

There are some sensations vilified as “unpleasant” and so much story for checking.

You're right, some sensations or experiences when combined with certain labels of the mind are taken to be so.. solid and unacceptable. Places where inquiry stops and stories/fixing restart full throttle as a panicked reaction.

And yes everything can become a story, but the story is complementary not primary. Seeing its emptiness, reduces its “intensity”, it makes it even funny. So yes there can be a story about “avoidance” and that is fine as long as you know that stories are just stories (empty) and you give those sensations a chance to become less “unpleasant”.

I see. Stories are bound to happen and be created, there is no control over thoughts that arise anyways. And thus so will stories about the 'process' or the 'avoidance/loneliness' in this specific case.

Is it up to you what will come next? Can you really decide to go and be an ascetic?

The thoughts and actions leading to that decision may arise spontaneously. Including story and thought of "decider" and "doer" which still exists and quite intensely at times. But on the whole in life, with things related to the future, things are tending to move on their own and there is trust that "decisions" make themselves when required - or at least that's another "pleasant" story that exists currently :)

You see, “avoidance”/”resistance” and “surrendering” are two opposing stories about the same DE – it still happens only the content of the story is “optional”. There is no stopping what is happening...

Meaning, the thought that "I am resisting" or "I am surrendering" is story too? And that regardless of what you're doing in that moment, it could not have been any other way? That is true as an experience.

Can you change, create or avoid anything? The uncertainty stops being an issue, once you have finally stopped trying to resist what is happening, and stopped trying to change the world to your own liking, when all the story is seen as false and empty. You can do this with all the stories one by one as they come, or just accepting that all stories are empty and whatever they say it just does not correspond to reality. Then whatever comes is OK.

Right. Both ways - examining stories individually or releasing everything as a whole - happen on their own, sometimes one more suited than the other.

Are those “ideals”/expectations yours? Or they’ve been given to you?

Acquired, constructed from experiences and what 'others' like. One line of thinking here is the temptation to follow your "own" ideals instead of the others but on a fundamental level there's no difference where they came from other than a label. That being said I can find the story of "you should follow your own ideals" as something coming up now more recently. Fine, like you said, if it is recognized that it is a story like all else.

Why even try to restrict yourself (not that you can) to certain ideas, when you can be and you are so much more?

True, though if I had to explain why this happens the answer would be twofold:
1. The resistance to the uncertainty of just being
2. The desire/craving for engagement with ideals and stories largely due to there being examples where that engagement has "worked out" in the past so the conviction around that story has strengthened. (This lends itself to questioning what "worked out" means - and it is just pleasant sensations and favorable thought content).

What is it to be “smart” for example? Is there only one opinion on that and is it always the same?

No, differing opinions. Same goes for beautiful. There is definitely frequency bias at play here, where if a certain perception of smart or beautiful is shared by enough people and propagated often enough through personal experience that it becomes the 'ideal', 'desired' or perhaps even the 'only' way for that adjective to manifest. Objectively this certainly isn't true.

As long as it is not an obsession resulting from fear of death, then there is nothing wrong with it. In Buddhist tradition it is encouraged to live a healthy life as it gives a longer opportunity for exploring :)

Makes sense.

What is “directionless-ness” in DE? Does it has to do with control?

Yes, it has to do with having no promising or 'pleasant' future in sight. Letting go and being implies we do not create fanciful notions of the future, and this creates tension and craving for a storyline to grab, a thought saying "if I do such and such, then the 'future' will be better". So the tension around directionlessness is not just control, it is the illusion of decision-making and passing time both at work.

If you stopped thinking about what may happen and paid attention to what is actually happening right here, right now, there wouldn’t be any room for fear; there wouldn’t be any need to protect a an imaginary self from things that may or may not happen.

Funny, I hadn't read this until after typing my last paragraph. And it seems like a perfect response to it. I've found this has happened multiple times, it's like having a live conversation despite both sides being already written in one go!

The desire for control over the circumstances and others comes as a result of avoidance of unwanted outcomes and emotions. So explore these, why are they unwanted? What is wrong with them being here really? The end of trying to change what is starts with seeing that the controller is imagined.

They are considered unwanted and wrong because they are "unpleasant" and because they are antithetical to the idea and construction of what could be "pleasant" (two sides of the same coin, feeding each other). Of course, exploration of the 4th and 5th fetters deals with this directly and asks us to look for who/what is finding it unpleasant or necessitating the reaction. And investigation of course reveals nothing - while the discomfort stays and is still seeming "real" in that moment even without a "who" behind it. Perhaps it is with time and continuing to "be" with that discomfort that there is space to engage in the questioning and see through a controller in totality, in a lasting sense.

You think that love and acceptance have to come from someone else, from outside; only then, you imagine, will you be happy and feel loved. But the love you seek is not “out there”. There is no one person out there who can give it to you. And before you rush into new age ideas, check: what are “others” , what is “you”?

Haha, a common path for thoughts to take here as mentioned earlier is to appease the "self" instead of "other" as a means of deriving love. While both are empty.

Can love come from a colour? Is there a difference between a “stranger” and a “loved one” without the thoughts?

Truly, the feeling of love can come from anywhere and anything. Stranger or loved one, wouldn't matter if the arising thoughts and sensations arranged around that object in the same way. But with the restrictions posed by continuous engagement with thought, they aren't able to do that.

Love is always here and now, underneath all the sad stories of unfulfilled love. It’s just has to be noticed. The “heart” wants to love freely, openly, and limitlessly. It is the recognition that “everything” is connected, all is one. Love is THIS, surrendering to what IS. It’s only expectations that come in the way of the flow of love, make it conditional and one-sided. Instead of seeing what is lacking, notice what is already here, “allow” life to be :)

Thank you. The recognition of one-ness and non-separation occurs in glimpses and brief moments - before un-surrendering happens spontaneously.

Love,
Shreyash

Hi Shreyash

By "checking the validity of the story" and "diving in", do you mean ignoring thought content and exploring the experience on a raw sense level? Or taking the story content at face value and engaging in inquiry/comparison with it? (as you said it can be beneficial to compare the story to DE).

Yes to both. The second is actually a consequence of the first. You see a “problematic” story, you explore DE and the story corrects itself – simple :)

Also, if I engage in this comparison of the story to DE, there is really no comparison xD. There is nothing in DE to compare to, DE is empty of story and analysis, so putting a story, thought or sensation next to DE is like apples to oranges, comparing a fabrication with something that is nothing at all. Though I suppose it is in doing this repeatedly without judging that the story is seen as something apart from what is, and the pull begins to reduce?

Ok this statement is a bit unproductive. You compare the DE story with the old story. Is this better?

True, the story about inquiry and exploration also tends to form. Another gap to witness.

Without thought there is no meaning, no description. We wouldn’t be discussing things if there wasn’t a story/description of inquiry and exploration.

What a story indeed! Can you decide to change “yourself”? What will change what? How?

A lot of story comes up around this answer, since as I mentioned, the "changing myself" or "being seen positively" story is probably the most frequent and weighty one that draws engagement all the time. Though as expected, any "realness" to that story doesn't hold up to direct looking - there isn't anything there to change nor anyone there to change it nor a timeline for it to be changed on. But emotional/sensation content is strong and produces a reaction and subsequently contracts thoughts back into the existing idea of 'self', and then a changer, a final destination, a story, etc.

We are not actually interested in the stories that come around, the questions are pointers to DE so I expect the answers to be around the DE. When you say: “emotional/sensation content is strong and produces a reaction and subsequently contracts thoughts back into the existing idea of 'self', and then a changer, a final destination, a story, etc.” is this really happening in DE? Are the sensations strong or the thought content (of the emotional content)? What is wrong with strong sensations – they fluctuate – there are high’s and low’s? I’m not discussing the ridiculousness/emptiness of the thought content… Obviously there is an expectation here that there will be only low to moderate, “pleasant” sensations after seeing no self. Why, I don’t know. But why would “self” spring into existence when the sensations are strong or “unpleasant”? If there are only thoughts about a self that it’s fine – thoughts really say stupid stuff…What believes the thoughts is the question here? What is outside of thoughts that has the capacity to believe them?
Here is a funny video that you might find useful:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXfltmzRG-g

They are considered unwanted and wrong because they are "unpleasant" and because they are antithetical to the idea and construction of what could be "pleasant" (two sides of the same coin, feeding each other). Of course, exploration of the 4th and 5th fetters deals with this directly and asks us to look for who/what is finding it unpleasant or necessitating the reaction.

They will be considered “unwanted” until they are considered “unpleasant”. They will be considered “unpleasant” until they are actually experienced (without the thought). The 4th and 5th fetters are not dealing with the “who” as this is already seen in the 1st, but with the actual feeling of the raw sensations – staying in the gap (no thoughts), just being with the sensation until its intensity is “weakened” (perceived as “weakened”)

I’m not going to reply to all your comments as it seemingly boils down the “sense of self” that is still appearing – “sense” of decision maker, doer, thinker, etc…
So…
What discerns it, distinguishes it, filters it out from "not me", etc.?
If and when that sense of "me" arises, what creates and/or notices it?
When there is a sense of "me", and thus "not me" as well, look for what "in here" looks out at what is "out there" (i.e., "not me")?
And having experienced a "me" your whole life: was it because you identified with an aspect of experience, or identified as an aspect of experience? Is/was there a difference between identifying with and identifying as something?
Bring the “self of me” into focus by one of these strong sensations… Notice when the "sense of me" arises - as soon as the sensation is recognized, or shortly thereafter? Notice the “physical” sensations associated that arise, associated with the arising of the “I” or “me” sense - like closing or tightening.
Does it seem as though there is something of a separation to experience, by which there is a “me” side and a “not me” side? Does it feel as though you take a subtle step back from experience, into your side? Does there seem to be both an inner and an outer aspect to experience? Does it feel like you are awareness, consciousness, one with everything, or presence? Is there a subtle sense of comfort, stability or reliability in affirming your existence? Now, close your eyes and allow all thoughts and images to again fade. What happens to the sense of “I” or “me”? What happens to the sense of there being an inner and outer aspect to experience?
Please play with these questions (LOOK) not just answer from knowledge that is already accumulated as a result of the inquiry! Have a fresh LOOK!

Love
Rali