The Gate

Hello everyone,

My name is Tush and I want to be guided to break through the illusion of the self. Iv been reading the threads on the forum for quite a while and find myself wanting to join. Throughout time, Iv been meditating, reading 'so called' spiritual books and trying to find the way. My expectation is to come to a real seeing of the fact that there is nobody here doing or planning and just life living itself.

Thank you and hope to hear from you soon

Regards,

Tush

Hello Tush - Welcome to the LU forum.

My name is Tush and I want to be guided to break through the illusion of the self

Great!

Throughout time, Iv been meditating, reading 'so called' spiritual books and trying to find the way.

What sort of things have you been reading? Have you followed any particular non-dual teachers?

My expectation is to come to a real seeing of the fact that there is nobody here doing or planning and just life living itself.

Sure. What would this mean for you? Do you have any expectations?
Do you have any worries about the process?

I look forward to hearing from you
Xain ♥

Dear Xain,thank you for agreeing to guide me,very grateful..

What sort of things have you been reading? Have you followed any particular non-dual teachers?

I've been reading books for Osho,Eckhart tolle,Mooji,scott kiloby and listening to many non-dual talks on youtube..
But I did not follow anyone in particular.

Sure. What would this mean for you? Do you have any expectations?
Do you have any worries about the process?

It would mean that my agitation for keep searching will come to an end.Why live in an illusion if there is freedom of the trap of thoughts.My only expectation is to see it and know it for sure and what might comes after that is not in the hand.
Yes,I am worry about not being able to see it.

Thank you,regards
tush

It would mean that my agitation for keep searching will come to an end.

Specifically, my guidance will be for one thing only - That is a realisation.
To realise that 'I', the separate self we believe we are is entirely dependant on thoughts. It will be realised that there is no inherently existing 'real' self at all. Nor has there ever been. Nor will there ever be. It has all been a 'trick of the mind' (so to speak).

Why live in an illusion if there is freedom of the trap of thoughts.

I understand - But notice the paradox here. It is believed that there is an 'I' (separate self) living in an illusion, and that 'I' will no-longer live in an illusion.
Thoughts themselves may or may not change at all. But certainly it will be realised that every thought about a separate self, about an 'I' is nothing more THAN a thought. That the thoughts don't relate to anything 'real' (inherently existing).

Yes,I am worry about not being able to see it.

It's OK. We can go through things slowly and at your own pace. I tend to liken this to a 'chat with a friend' really, although most of the conversation will be me guiding you by asking you questions.

Please put aside all expectations that you may have about this process other than the one goal that I detailed above.
Also for the time being, please put aside all non-dual ideas and concepts you may have read about or been told about, and approach this very freshly and simply from honestly held beliefs.

Have a look at these guidelines which will assist us both.

1. Please post at least once a day, if you cannot post, or need more time, let me know.
2. Be 100% honest in your answers and inquiry.
3. Answer from direct personal experience only (we can go into this in more depth later if needed).
4. Read the disclaimer on the Liberation Unleashed main site -> http://liberationunleashed.com/disclaimer-2/

It is useful to use the 'Quote' button as I have to quote my replies - It will make the conversation easier.
A guide for it's use can be found here: http://liberationunleashed.com/nation/v ... ?f=4&t=660

Let me know if you have anything else you would like to mention or questions you may have, and we can begin if you would like.

Xain ♥

Specifically, my guidance will be for one thing only - That is a realisation.
To realise that 'I', the separate self we believe we are is entirely dependant on thoughts. It will be realised that there is no inherently existing 'real' self at all. Nor has there ever been. Nor will there ever be. It has all been a 'trick of the mind' (so to speak).

That's the goal .

I understand - But notice the paradox here. It is believed that there is an 'I' (separate self) living in an illusion, and that 'I' will no-longer live in an illusion.
Thoughts themselves may or may not change at all. But certainly it will be realised that every thought about a separate self, about an 'I' is nothing more THAN a thought. That the thoughts don't relate to anything 'real' (inherently existing).

Understand that the belief in the existence of an I is the illusion itself,no I living in illusion.

It's OK. We can go through things slowly and at your own pace. I tend to liken this to a 'chat with a friend' really, although most of the conversation will be me guiding you by asking you questions.

Loved it,thank you.

Please put aside all expectations that you may have about this process other than the one goal that I detailed above.
Also for the time being, please put aside all non-dual ideas and concepts you may have read about or been told about, and approach this very freshly and simply from honestly held beliefs.

Ok,just follow your guidance for the realization of no I.And sure will put aside all concepts about non-doual ideas.
Yes for the honesty.
I read the disclaimer and agree ,will also post every day and answer from personal direct experience only and again yes for the honesty.

Let me know if you have anything else you would like to mention or questions you may have, and we can begin if you would like.

Thank you,ready to follow your guidance.Just to let you know that my mind never shut up always in an inner dialogue*If it is usefull.

regards,
tush

Just to let you know that my mind never shut up always in an inner dialogue*If it is usefull.

Yes, I understand.
There is nothing wrong with that - In fact, just noticing it is the case is very useful - You have identified what is happening.

The first thing to do is to identify what you believe yourself to be. What is 'I'?
What does the word 'I' point to? What is it responsible for? (Although I will use the word 'you' to point back).

This is very simple - Just honest basic beliefs about yourself here.
For example, do you believe that you are a separate person (a body?) that is looking at a screen right now, reading words off it?
Perhaps you can feel the pressure or feeling of your body against a chair right now? Perhaps you can hear sounds in the room or outside.
You are a person who thinks a lot - You feel trapped by your own thoughts (the thoughts are yours).
You create the thoughts and you control the thoughts.
You are a person who can choose and has free-will. You chose to come and have a guidance here, and in a few moments you will choose what you write in reply to this message and will type it onto a keyboard.

How does that sound? Remember - simple basic beliefs. No fancy 'non-dual' principles here.
What do you honestly believe you are? What is this 'I'?

Xain ♥

You are a person who thinks a lot - You feel trapped by your own thoughts (the thoughts are yours).
You create the thoughts and you control the thoughts.

Not exactly.I've been watching thoughts and came to see that they just appear any time out of the blue,there is no control over thoughts.I some times get surprised how I remember what I feel need to remember.All the images and words just come and keep going but the paradox is I really think they are MY thoughts.

What do you honestly believe you are? What is this 'I'?

It is the body for sure with the thoughts and the sensations,all together is the person that is called me.It is like I am ""all that I know""".

Thank you,
tush

Thoughts . . .

Not exactly.I've been watching thoughts and came to see that they just appear any time out of the blue,there is no control over thoughts.I some times get surprised how I remember what I feel need to remember.All the images and words just come and keep going but the paradox is I really think they are MY thoughts.

It is good that you've already done some introspection into these things. We will cover thoughts fully later on.

It is the body for sure with the thoughts and the sensations

Good. 'I am this body' is a very standard belief. It is considered that way because all the senses appear to be performed by the body, and also it is assumed that the body is under 'my control'.

Let us look at the senses to begin with.
If we think about seeing for a moment, we can go to memory and say all the things we saw yesterday . . . and if we think, we can imagine all the things we might see tomorrow.
All these are ideas - There are two parts - There is 'what we will see' and also 'us seeing them' - there is a subject 'me' (or I) and an object being seen 'what I see'.
Now, instead of thoughts, what I want you to do is to try to work out what answers can be found from the experience itself - right here and right now.

Right now, a screen is being seen.
Also words are being read off the screen.

Ok, now inquire . . . in the seeing of the screen . . . IN THE EXPERIENCE OF DOING IT . . . can what is seeing the screen be found?
Are there two parts in the experience?
1) A screen being seen
2) An 'I' that is doing the seeing.

Do the same for 'reading' as well (making what is seen into intelligible words and sentences)
Ok, now inquire . . . in the reading of this text . . . IN THE EXPERIENCE OF DOING IT . . . can what is doing the reading be found?
Are there two parts in the experience?
1) Words being read
2) An 'I' that is doing the reading.

Or in these examples, is it better to say there is just 'seeing' and 'reading' - Can what is doing these things really be found?
What do you find?

Xain ♥

Hi,

in the seeing of the screen . . . IN THE EXPERIENCE OF DOING IT . . . can what is seeing the screen be found?
Are there two parts in the experience?
1) A screen being seen
2) An 'I' that is doing the seeing.

In the experience of seeing there can't be found that which is doing the seeing.There is the screen seen with no effort,its just there.There are not two parts,only the screen,no entity is seen doing it.

in the reading of this text . . . IN THE EXPERIENCE OF DOING IT . . . can what is doing the reading be found?
Are there two parts in the experience?
1) Words being read
2) An 'I' that is doing the reading.

In the experience of reading can't see an I doing the effort to read,there are words being read.No two parts are seen just the reading happening.

Or in these examples, is it better to say there is just 'seeing' and 'reading' - Can what is doing these things really be found?
What do you find?

If I just say seeing than I see and reading than I am reading it does not feel wierd its ok.
I noticed that thoughts are saying that "If there is no you can't also find the object",its known there are thoughts of the influence of previous readings-but did not find someone doing the seeing or the reading.

Regards,
Tush

Hi Xain,
All is well?

tush

Hi again Tush

Sorry for the delay - I was at an LU meeting in Worthing this weekend, and away from the computer.

In the experience of seeing there can't be found that which is doing the seeing.There is the screen seen with no effort,its just there.There are not two parts,only the screen,no entity is seen doing it.

Good. Yes. It is very simple.

If I just say seeing than I see and reading than I am reading it does not feel wierd its ok.

No change of language or writing is needed.
All communication like this writing on the screen is the apparent passing of thoughts and ideas.
So saying 'I am seeing a screen' is fine as an idea - a thought.
What we are doing here in this guidance is to see if that 'I' is a real inherently existing 'thing' and NOT just an idea / a belief / a thought. Can it really be found.

I noticed that thoughts are saying that "If there is no you can't also find the object"

This is good consideration. In the subject/object way of considering things there is assumed to be an object being seen and an object doing the seeing. Further examination can be done in this area, but for the moment (and not to get ahead of ourselves) let's just concentrate on one object - the separate self - the 'I'.

Let us try 'hearing' now in the same way.

Listen for a few moments in the sounds in the room or outside.

Now inquire:
In hearing - in the experience itself, can what is doing that hearing be found?
Are there two parts in the experience of hearing?
1) Sounds being heard
2) An 'I' that is hearing them.
Or is there just 'what is being heard' in the same way as you found in seeing there was just 'what is being seen'.

Xain ♥

Hello Xain,

Sorry for the delay - I was at an LU meeting in Worthing this weekend, and away from the computer.

Its Ok , I was just wonder if all is well with you.

Listen for a few moments in the sounds in the room or outside.

Now inquire:
In hearing - in the experience itself, can what is doing that hearing be found?
Are there two parts in the experience of hearing?
1) Sounds being heard
2) An 'I' that is hearing them.
Or is there just 'what is being heard' in the same way as you found in seeing there was just 'what is being seen'.

That which is doing the hearing can't be found.
In the experience of hearing there is only the sound,no entity I seen thats doing the hearing.

Thank you lots,
tush

That which is doing the hearing can't be found.
In the experience of hearing there is only the sound,no entity I seen that's doing the hearing.

Good.

Let us turn now to 'feeling' - This is a strong sense which is usually considered to be very 'close to home' in relation to the body (the belief that the body is me 'inside' and responsible for feeling an external world 'outside').

Do this:

Place a hand on a flat surface like a table or desk.
Close your eyes.
Now focus on the feeling sensation of (what we normally consider to be) 'hand on desk'.

Now inquire:
In the feeling . . . in the experience itself, are there two things to be found?
1) A surface being felt
2) A body (or an 'I') that is doing the feeling
Or is there just a sensation?
Can what is performing the sense of 'feeling' be found in the experience?
Can an 'I' (or a body) be found that is doing something called 'feeling'?

If it is said 'I am feeling' - What is this 'I' in the sentence then?
Is it something inherently existing that can be found? Or is it more of an assumption / an idea / a belief?

Xain ♥

Hi Xain,

In the feeling . . . in the experience itself, are there two things to be found?
1) A surface being felt
2) A body (or an 'I') that is doing the feeling
Or is there just a sensation?
Can what is performing the sense of 'feeling' be found in the experience?
Can an 'I' (or a body) be found that is doing something called 'feeling'?

I put my hand on the table then I felt only the hand then the sense became the table and could not feel just the sensation,every time there is an image of a hand or a table and I've been drawn to look at those images not the sensations alone.It was hare so I took a break and came back,I realized that I only have the ability to directly experience 'sensations'.There is no specific sensation that can be called' table' or a specific sensation that can called 'hand'..there are only sensations that then can labelled 'whatever'.
The I that can be found to experience those sensations is not there.

If it is said 'I am feeling' - What is this 'I' in the sentence then?
Is it something inherently existing that can be found? Or is it more of an assumption / an idea / a belief?

The I that claimed the feeling of the sensations is just an idea about someone who could experience the sense of the sensations.

Many thanks,
tush

I put my hand on the table then I felt only the hand then the sense became the table and could not feel just the sensation,every time there is an image of a hand or a table and I've been drawn to look at those images not the sensations alone

This is very good. You have noticed what is happening.
There is a sensation. Also there is a mental image of what that sensation is meant to 'be', so if the sensation is meant to be 'a hand', then a mental image of a hand is imagined.
Just notice this.
We are not interested at the moment in the mental image, only the sensation itself.

It was hard so I took a break and came back,I realized that I only have the ability to directly experience 'sensations'. There is no specific sensation that can be called' table' or a specific sensation that can called 'hand'..there are only sensations that then can labelled 'whatever'.

Again, excellent.
Yes - There is just 'sensation'.

The I that claimed the feeling of the sensations is just an idea about someone who could experience the sense of the sensations.

Yes.

So can it be seen that in all the senses, an 'I' that is meant to perform them cannot be found. Neither can 'a body' be found that is performing them. In all cases of 'I feel, 'I see', 'I hear', 'I smell', 'I taste' a separate 'I', an inherently existing person cannot be found. So in all these cases 'I' is 'just an idea about someone who was doing it'.
Smell and taste are weak senses which I don't normally cover, but you can approach them in exactly the same way.

You are doing very well indeed - Let us press on to 'choice and control'. You can examine this in exactly the same way as all the other stuff we have been doing.

Exercise:

Choose one of the hands - It doesn't matter which one.
Now, when you feel you wish to, raise that hand into the air.
Do this exercise as many times as you feel you want to.

Inquire - In choosing the hand, in the experience of choosing itself, can what is doing that choosing be found?
Can what is making the choice be identified? Is the body making a choice? Is the mind making a choice?
Is there an 'I' here making the choice?

Similarly with control - In raising the hand into the air, in the experience itself, can what is making that happen be found? What is controlling the hand? What is making the muscles tense? Is there an 'I' to be found that is doing this?

What can be found?

Xain ♥