The Gate

Ok, give me a name to call you.
i presume from your pm you have read the contract ?
Tell of your expectations for liberation. How will it be ?

Ok, give me a name to call you.

Paul

i presume from your pm you have read the contract ?

Correct

Tell of your expectations for liberation. How will it be ?

Peaceful, an end of searching, feeling of wholeness.

and thank you

Tell of your expectations for liberation. How will it be ?
Peaceful, ..., feeling of wholeness.

Are there sensation associated with these feelings ? What i mean is that both peacefulness and wholeness are concepts. Labels for something. Do you see this ?

Are there sensation associated with these feelings ? What i mean is that both peacefulness and wholeness are concepts. Labels for something. Do you see this ?

Yes, by peacefulness I was refering to a state (mind/bodily sensation) which I have no doubt temporarly experienced in the past.

When I say wholeness, this comes from a recent realisation that in years past I had desires to "have" everything, "experience" everything... but that these desires perhaps arose from there being a world "out there"

Seeing the impossibility of this makes me think there is something lacking "within" (the body).

I guess either way you look at it there is a me feeling a void/inadequacy in being.

Are there sensation associated with these feelings ?

Actually, I don't know. Maybe more of a spaciousness and lack of cloudiness from a mind presence.

What i mean is that both peacefulness and wholeness are concepts. Labels for something. Do you see this ?

In that direct experiences seen as more enjoyable than others have been labelled and now craved, yes. Yet, I know that setting up these comparisons is a trap, but it still seems "boring" when I just accept everything as it is with disinterest and non-comparison. Then I go and draw a superiority about being able to view things like this. The mind - it seems never to stop!

I was refering to a state (mind/bodily sensation)

Do you have sensation in the mind ? or are you referring to bodily sensations that result from thoughts (mind stuff) ?

When I say wholeness,

So you have a story about what wholeness is, and in years past there were sensations (feeling states) associated with the story ? is this correct ?

Seeing the impossibility of this makes me think there is something lacking "within" (the body).

So in the story there is also elements of it being possible, if only conditions are right ?

I guess either way you look at it there is a me feeling a void/inadequacy in being.

Ok, using direct experience LOOK for that me. Locate it and use words (thoughts) only to describe what you experience as you look. Any thought that is the result of another thought is concept and is a distraction. Just look and report.

feeling a void/inadequacy

When you say "feeling", are we really talking about sensations or are we talking mind stuff ?

a mind presence.

What do you mean by "mind presence" ?

it still seems "boring" when I just accept everything as it is

Then this is not acceptance. Describe "boring".

The mind - it seems never to stop!

That's right, it doesn't, no matter what you have heard (mostly myth) about enlightenment. An indifference to the mind stuff can develop and it fades into the background like the traffic going past.

vince

Do you have sensation in the mind ? or are you referring to bodily sensations that result from thoughts (mind stuff) ?

Yes, you're right. Bodily sensations that result from mind stuff. Tense sensations for example.

Which is reacting. Experienced in reality. But reacting to a story - not reality.

So you have a story about what wholeness is, and in years past there were sensations (feeling states) associated with the story ? is this correct ?

Correct.

So in the story there is also elements of it being possible, if only conditions are right ?

Yes. If the conditions are right, or if things are seen without distortion.

Ok, using direct experience LOOK for that me. Locate it and use words (thoughts) only to describe what you experience as you look. Any thought that is the result of another thought is concept and is a distraction. Just look and report.

When i go to look, I look inside the body immediately. In through the head and down into the heart area. As I continue to look, all I come to is a "buzz" or kinesthetic vibration. Then I start to look out from the body (not for "me" - the search for me is quickly given up and observation in directions outward from the body begins).

When you say "feeling", are we really talking about sensations or are we talking mind stuff ?

Mind stuff would be more accurate. A strong attachment to a concept.

What do you mean by "mind presence" ?

Interference of mind. (When I wrote that, the thought arose that the phrasing would be confusing)

Then this is not acceptance. Describe "boring".

The mind wants to come and have a party whenever there is a hint of "clarity" or spaciousness. In part this is more entertainment, yet more frustration concurrently.

That there still is not "enough" within the immediate experience is what I mean by boring. Enough what - I don't even know.

thanks

Which is reacting. Experienced in reality

Experienced AS reality. But let's go a little further here. An Experience is a story which you are Experiencing as a memory. As it is occurring in the NOW, it is Experiencing.

But reacting to a story - not reality.

The story is real, it's contents are concept. Story is always About..., never IT.

So you have a story about what wholeness is

...and you now recognize this as a story ?
Stories may or may not be accurate. Stories of Future are loaded with traps. It's a good idea to always include a caveat with them that they may not occur as the script depicts. e.g. "i'm going to the shop to get milk, but (caveat) anything could happen on the way that might change the outcome"

Yes. If the conditions are right, or if things are seen without distortion.

Can you add a caveat to this one ?

When i go to look,..(for a Me)

So No 'Self' or Me or I found anywhere in actuality ?
But if you consult the mind, there are perhaps hundreds of characteristics of Paul. In fact a whole, very detailed story of a Self, right ?

there is a me feeling a void/inadequacy...Mind stuff would be more accurate. A strong attachment to a concept.

Tell about this "strong attachment".

What do you mean by "mind presence" ?
Interference of mind.

Do you mean something like a surge of thoughts ?

That there still is not "enough" within the immediate experience is what I mean by boring. Enough what - I don't even know.

Have you got a clue about Enough FOR what ?
A good technique is to ask the question (of yourself) then watch the first thoughts that arise. Then stay with those thoughts. Examine them for credibility.

vince

...and you now recognize this as a story ?

Yes, I can see that it is one of many concepts created to give validity to a "me".

Stories may or may not be accurate. Stories of Future are loaded with traps.

Agreed. In the past I have prided My-Self in it's ability to be future oriented. The more frequently things didn't meet exact expectations led to a very different place. Much more allowing of the way things are/unfold and acknowledgemnt it is how it is supposed to be. A lot more ease this way. It has also assisted in dropping some other judgements. I can see how the thread of "I" weaves it's way through every belief. Sometimes a lot more easily than others.

Can you add a caveat to this one ?

I think it would be easier to just reword it (leaving out the concepts, expectations and caveats):

Regardless of the conditions experiencing will occur.

So No 'Self' or Me or I found anywhere in actuality ?
But if you consult the mind, there are perhaps hundreds of characteristics of Paul. In fact a whole, very detailed story of a Self, right ?

No, no Self. I see more clearly that Paul arises within the mind when a belief about something is observed. And that this happens with great regularity.

Tell about this "strong attachment".

I think the strong attachment to the idea of a void/inadequacy comes from a knowing that "Paul" cannot be perfect.

What do you mean by "mind presence" ?
Interference of mind.
Do you mean something like a surge of thoughts ?

Yes. Or getting lost so deeply in thought that there is not any awareness of the physical body/world.

I was thinking about this last night, wondering, when this situation occurs is there actually a body, world etc... at all, in this situation. Or is it just that the experience is so narrow (within mind) that there is an enormous lack of awareness.

Have you got a clue about Enough FOR what ?

Ha, yes. As faint as the thought is. There is constantly a thought that enters, "This can't be it".

It is never enough FOR "Me"

thank you

Can you add a caveat to this one ?
I think it would be easier to just reword it (leaving out the concepts, expectations and caveats):
Regardless of the conditions experiencing will occur.

Well the caveat is built in to that. That a specific outcome is not predictable.

Tell about this "strong attachment".
I think the strong attachment to the idea of a void/inadequacy comes from a knowing that "Paul" cannot be perfect.

i was really asking how you experience attachment, not what it was to. What sensations are associated, or is purely mental ?

getting lost so deeply in thought that there is not any awareness of the physical body/world.

Ah, a really good inquiry. When you are so deeply involve in some activity that the physical ceases to have any mental expression, then you could say that you are that activity, or you and the activity are One. There is only the activity. There is only Experiencing.
There is also no awareness of this. It takes mental involvement to have awareness.
Another relevant point is that the organism is quite capable of doing what is necessary without the involvement of the mind. The 'self' is quite redundant for competent operation.

There is constantly a thought that enters, "This can't be it".

Thoughts do that. Their job is to label and 'manage' everything and they will attempt to keep you in the familiar. They resist change.
Do thoughts have any credibility just because they exist ?
How many of the 70000 daily thoughts that arise for you are complete garbage ?
Or put it another way, how many are actually useful ?

i was really asking how you experience attachment, not what it was to. What sensations are associated, or is purely mental ?

No sensations. Just a circular mental dialogue.

Do thoughts have any credibility just because they exist ?

No. Their existence doesn't automatically presume credibility. I see that thoughts just arise and that I can't produce particular thoughts just because I want to; and that the habitual reference to "I" seems to compound the effect and whip up more thoughts - generally associated with the I.

Or put it another way, how many are actually useful ?

Maybe a dozen or two.

Explain in detail what the illusion of separate self is, when it starts and how it works.

Explain in detail what the illusion of separate self is, when it starts and how it works.

The illusion of separate self is that there is an independant entity that is inside a world all on its own.

From watching adults interacting with infants and drilling them to label numerous objects, such as Mum, Dad, ear, nose... it becomes evident that one of the first cognitive thoughts would be that "this body is Paul". Initially while pointing out with a finger and eventually (with training) by pointing at the belly. From this THOUGHT, and the acquisition of language, the child can begin to label other things of the world now viewed as "outside" it. Then comes the observation of there being other things, followed by a transition to subtler distinctions, such as size, shape, colour, etc... Still very cute, still very "innocent". From here, even subtler distinctions like "that big, green monster is BAD" take place and it seems to just be a snowball effect from here with more and more labels and subtler and subtler differences being learned.

Paying more and more attention to thoughts provides constant reinforcement of a differentiation of subject and object leading to the (ephemeral) thought/notion of identity. From this thought comes the thought that "other" things can be affected; "I" start to try and make things "better" - or even sabotage other things to ensure superiority.

Writing this I can almost see how if I were able to drop all the labels I could momentarily see whatever it is I'm looking for.

It's more of a thought, but there is an understanding that if it's not in me it doesn't exist.

Anything not detected within this sensory field I experience, can only exist in thought.

But, thoughts in the form of memories, even immediate memory, makes what I experience appear in time and space.

I know this is all a lot of thinking, but I have never-the-less had greater calmness and ease within my experiences over the last day or two.

Ah, excellent description.
3) How does it feel to see this? describe in detail.

4) How would you describe it to somebody who has never heard about this illusion but is curious about it.

How does it feel to see this? describe in detail.

It's nice, but things feel as they have always felt. It's kinda funny that everything just does everything itself. Remembering this clears the mental space of so many thoughts. So, it feels like waves of calmness are appearing more often and for longer periods, maybe.

There's still an extremely habitual tendancy to latch on to the thoughts that appear and formulate elaborate stories surrounding the individual.

It's not an instantaneous process to recognise thoughts and come back to rest in just experience; and as soon as that happens, the doubting starts to occur; and then it's not an instantaneous process to recognise thoughts and come back to rest in just experience... :-)

Yeah, I think that's the best way to convey how it "feels" to see this. It's definitely a gradual process, letting go of the IDEA that there is a doer.