The Gate

LU is focused guiding for seeing there is no real, inherent 'self' - what do you understand by this?
No-self is visibly obvious to me - in the moment. I can clearly see this: there is no 'me.' Whatever is here in this seeing has no personal characteristics at all, is just something like presence, or clarity - except that those words imply some 'thing,' and this is much closer to nothing-at-all-in-particular. I cannot see any self, in now.

What are you looking for at LU?
I'm still suffering. I get agonized, or have agonized experiences in a way that seems very identified. There's some disconnect, the nature of which I can't see, between seeing clearly there's no 'me' and this suffering, as if the being-in-time I'm supposed to be predominates a lot. I'm looking for some reflection, a nudge, a questioning, open seeing from someone to help me lose that disconnect - or help me discover there's never any time except now, the 'time' in which there's no 'me' visible.

What do you expect from a guided conversation?
I don't know I expect anything. I would hope to be connected with someone who knows the gate is gateless, who could nudge me or open the possibility of seeing beyond the impasse I seem in currently. I'm willing to go as deeply as I can in a conversation in which examining 'what's true' goes on at the most rigorous level.

What is your experience in terms of spiritual practices, seeking and inquiry?
My whole life has been about 'the great matter.' As a 5 year old I played with seeing what the next thought would be, and that was more than 60 years ago. I lived in India with a teacher, and had just about endless membership in different communities of spiritual practice and exploration. The last 10 or so years I've just lived with the gradually-opening recognition that what I seek (or have sought...) is here, now, and could not be anywhere else. Most recently, written inquiry with myself has been fruitful.

On a scale from 1 to 10, how willing are you to question any currently held beliefs about 'self? 11

Hi

I would be happy to guide you.

Please confirm that you have read the rules of posting daily if possible, answering in complete honesty and setting aside other modalities for now.

My name is Sunil.

How do you like to be adressed?

Welcome.

Hi Sunil,

Thank you.

I understand and will abide by the rules of posting daily if possible, answering in complete honesty, and setting aside other modalities for now.

I generally go by 'Glenn.'

I look forward to our dialog.

Glenn

Hi Glenn,

There seems to be glitch as i didnt get a reminder, hence a tardy foolow up. But we will fix that.

You said

still suffering. I get agonized, or have agonized experiences in a way that seems very identified. There's some disconnect, the nature of which I can't see, between seeing clearly there's no 'me' and this suffering, as if the being-in-time I'm supposed to be predominates a lot. I'm looking for some reflection, a nudge, a questioning, open seeing from someone to help me lose that disconnect - or help me discover there's never any time except now, the 'time' in which there's no 'me' visible

Can you please expand a bit on the following terms you used,

Agonized experiences that seem very identified

As if being-in-time im supposed to be predominates.

Take some specific, concrete examples to let me understand what you mean.

Thanks.

Thanks Sunil, I wondered.

An example of getting agonized: planned something with my girlfriend yesterday, and it didn't pan out, at all. I became moody, petulant, said out loud to myself "I'm an asshole." Was contracted, upset, self-attacking and unpleasant to be around. Felt like a mess, and unable to extricate myself from the distress of it ('agonized' is perhaps too strong a word, except sometimes.) Only when she said "Couldn't we just have a nice time together anyway?" did I start to recover from my distress.
I feel very identified as this upset person. That seems like who I am, in that moment. Any kind of seeing-spaciousness vanishes from view.

Earlier in the day saw a client for the first time who I liked, and could work with - and she called later in the day to say she wanted to work with a woman therapist instead. For a while I could feel the rightness of that, and then began to get very distressed about the contraction in my business, which has been going on for a while now. I'm still covering my bills, more or less, but I get very anxious at times in a kind of looping refrain of "Oh what will become of me?"!!
The chap who will at some unspecified later time have a downfall I call a being-in-time. And then there's now, and the obviousness (when it's not hidden by distress or upset or gloomy predicting of the future) of there being no one here in now. Seeing, but not by anybody.

I have the sense a bit that I'm repeating, in the last paragraph, what I said in my intro responses to the gate questions. I seem to be someone, in time, but when I look in now, there's no one. And it's very much the 'someone in time' who seems psychologically and emotionally existent, and gets upset. I'm sorry if this doesn't communicate very well, and hope I can get clearer about this with you.

Thanks Sunil.

Hi Glenn,

I think i get what you are struggling with. Correct me if i do not.

You feel that the self is dependent on time. Sometimes you find it missing when you are at peace but solidifies in stressful situations. Is that so?

Now can you compare your direct experience in these two states?

Remember, we only take direct experience to be true, not theories or concepts or ideas.

So in DE what do you find right now?

Give me all the details based on all your senses.

Thanks.

Hi Glenn,

I would also like to ask you about your expectations?

Please try yo identify them as much as possible. You may also look at the list of popular misexpectations on the home page.


Thanks.

Thanks Sunil,

In reverse order of your posts:

When I look at 'What this is not' on the home page, "This is not about freedom from emotions and intense feelings" stands out for me. There's definitely a preference for the seraphic ease of emptiness, for the indescribable spaciousness I can see when I look backwards. So I definitely prefer being at ease. And accompanying many intense feelings, especially in intimate relationship, is self-attack, or thoughts that are critical of 'me'.This kind of experience with self-attacking thoughts is a lifelong challenge. I would certainly prefer, again, these kinds of thoughts to stop, change or be gotten rid of, so perhaps that item too, "This is not about stopping thoughts, changing thoughts, getting rid of thoughts" might fit for me, despite the fact that I know none of those alterations are possible! I know very well that sitting quietly the thoughts happen by themselves. And that this is always true.

Yes, my self is dependent on time, as you say. Seems to be. Comparing my direct experience when I'm feeling at peace (walking by myself in nature, for example) with when I feel agitated and upset (most often in relationship with my girlfriend, or about money/future) I would have to say, being intellectually rigorous, that when I'm upset there is simply a lot of fast-moving and powerful sensations, feelings, and thoughts.
And perhaps what I'm calling 'being intellectually rigorous' is simply looking in direct experience, because in any moment of upset I could simply remain in the observing position. What I've called to you 'very identified' is when there's some sense of being swept away in the current of all that experience. It could be that all that I'm missing here is simply remaining mindful — going on being this open space of noticing that's not anybody. (But that's tricky because then it becomes a sort of 'something'...)

So, my direct experience in these two states:
Peaceful: at ease in my body; harmonious flow of insightful and positive thoughts; sense of expansion; quiet pleasure.
Distressed: tension in my body; jangled and discordant, often self-attacking thoughts; sense of overall contraction; unpleasant states.

One more thing: noticing thoughts several times today to the effect of "This (LU) process can't help me."; "LU might bring about ease and freedom for others, but not for me."; "I'm impossible in this respect, and will never 'get it.'" And I wonder if those are the kinds of thoughts that live at the end of the road, when the chips are down and the back of self is against a wall.

Hope there's sufficient response above - and hope, too, it's not too much.

Thanks for your help.

And on a walk in the woods sudden terror, because the openness is SO open.

What if I am this openness? What if 'I am' IS
this openness?

Hi Glenn,

Very good start.

Can you tell me why LU says not to expect relief from strong emotions?

Can you locate a you when you are feeling open?

Can you locate a you when you feel strong emotions?

Where are they located?

A way to look for you is to close your eyes and point where you think the self is?

And finally you refer to your body. Why? Please explain what is a body?

Thanks.

...not to expect relief from strong emotions? Because they are real. And noticing how that admission goes up against a subtle belief that 'no-self' means 'no strong emotions.'

...a 'me' when I'm feeling open? No. Just in the last few hours, a kind of dizziness-inducing expansiveness, but no locatable me.

...a 'me' when I feel strong emotions? Sure seems like me - a whole conglomeration of tension, contraction, struggling-against-experience, whiplash-thoughts, and an overall sense of misery - that's 'me,' alright )-: I write that, and then there's the thought 'Could that really be all that I call 'me,' or call that 'being-in-time'?'

...located? In my body -- at least, the strong-emotions seem to be located in my body. In openness, I can't find a location. When there's strong contraction, and the various kinds of resistance to it (trying to relax it, wishing it weren't predominant, saying it's merely transient, and so not real, etc,) the overall sense of solidity and palpability is so intense that the existence of me-and-the-suffering-of-me seems indubitable. Where 'in my body' itself is located (in my apartment, in California) seems pretty fanciful, at the moment.

...what is a body? I look down at my hands, typing. That's my body, supposedly, as are the legs seen beneath the keyboard, and the vague sense of torso above legs. I can see all that, or a version of that, by looking in a mirror. "I look down"? Sensation of head moving, visual field altering in familiar ways that affirm that this is me - my head, eyes - shifting my gaze. So this is more 'body': sensations; predictable sequences of what seems like thought or intention, followed by action, and the background sensing of butt in chair, feet on ground, breathing, one hand scratching an itch on my leg. Hearing seems to affirm the presence of a location in space where I am/body is sitting (although when I zoom in on the hearing itself it has neither location nor boundary...) 'Body'? A strong belief all this is 'a body,' 'my body,' but also as I write this, an unstable and not-very-pleasant sense this is all very thin ice, somewhat the way a movie looks real but is just translucent images, a light source, and a screen.
'A body' is a stringing together of all the above - visuals, sensations, beliefs, a seeming-location, and a strong mental-schema much like the one everybody (!) possesses: I am this body. That's me in the mirror, and when I re-read the above, then gaze shifts to one side along with the thought 'This couldn't possibly be as sketchy as it looks here,' I find myself reflecting that my earlier answers which extensively involve 'my body' might be more of the same sketchiness....
A body is a thing I believe exists, that has 'a self' resident in it. I am supposed to be inside my body, and everybody believes this to be true about themselves. I do my best to treat my body - myself - well and with kindness....but it all feels very flimsy - until I feel distress and upset, and then my body feels rather solid.

Most of the time I take for granted I am my body, in a quietly unaware way. When I examine what is 'a body' it all looks a lot less substantial than my ordinary unaware assumptions.

Thanks Sunil.

Hi Glenn,

...not to expect relief from strong emotions? Because they are real. And noticing how that admission goes up against a subtle belief that 'no-self' means 'no strong emotions.'

what is real? the strong emotions or the self experiencing the emotions?

Can a nonexistent thing experience?

Where is this strong experience happening?

...a 'me' when I'm feeling open? No. Just in the last few hours, a kind of dizziness-inducing expansiveness, but no locatable me.

...a 'me' when I feel strong emotions? Sure seems like me - a whole conglomeration of tension, contraction, struggling-against-experience, whiplash-thoughts, and an overall sense of misery - that's 'me,' alright )-: I write that, and then there's the thought 'Could that really be all that I call 'me,' or call that 'being-in-time'?'

Remember we want to know this for sure. So what is it?

Are these two different things, a "me" or "being in time"?

Can you find either in direct experience?

No imaginations, Glenn. Just the actual experience by the senses you have.

You may want to brush up on what we call direct experience. There is an excellent article on home page by Neil.

...located? In my body -- at least, the strong-emotions seem to be located in my body. In openness, I can't find a location. When there's strong contraction, and the various kinds of resistance to it (trying to relax it, wishing it weren't predominant, saying it's merely transient, and so not real, etc,) the overall sense of solidity and palpability is so intense that the existence of me-and-the-suffering-of-me seems indubitable. Where 'in my body' itself is located (in my apartment, in California) seems pretty fanciful, at the moment.

"You can't find something" is a perfectly reasonable answer. Mind is programmed to keep looking for an answer even if there is none. Then it starts to believe in something totally un-provable like God or Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Take a look. Are you also trying to invent an answer?

in space where I am/body is sitting (although when I zoom in on the hearing itself it has neither location nor boundary...) 'Body'? A strong belief all this is 'a body,' 'my body,' but also as I write this, an unstable and not-very-pleasant sense this is all very thin ice, somewhat the way a movie looks real but is just translucent images, a light source, and a screen.
'A body' is a stringing together of all the above - visuals, sensations, beliefs, a seeming-location, and a strong mental-schema much like the one everybody (!) possesses: I am this body. That's me in the mirror, and when I re-read the above, then gaze shifts to one side along with the thought 'This couldn't possibly be as sketchy as it looks here,' I find myself reflecting that my earlier answers which extensively involve 'my body' might be more of the same sketchiness....
A body is a thing I believe exists, that has 'a self' resident in it. I am supposed to be inside my body, and everybody believes this to be true about themselves. I do my best to treat my body - myself - well and with kindness....but it all feels very flimsy - until I feel distress and upset, and then my body feels rather solid.

Most of the time I take for granted I am my body, in a quietly unaware way. When I examine what is 'a body' it all looks a lot less substantial than my ordinary unaware assumptions.

Great stuff. Whenever there is a gap, mind has been designed to fill in the gap with ideas, names, concepts and beliefs. This is why we do ONLY direct experience. You are on to something when you have these doubts.

A few experiments may bring it home.

Close your eyes, relax and brush your fingers against your hair. What makes this hair? Is it different from any other stringy soft material?

Do the same with the back of your hand? What makes that sensation a hand? And what makes it your hand?

Sitting in a chair, what makes that a chair or a butt or your chair or your butt?

Nice work, Glenn.

Come back with more.

Thanks Sunil,

What is real? The strong emotions, which are currents of sensation woven with thoughts and schematic images of 'me.' When I pay attention/when attention is closely paid to them, experiencing them is a single happening - any 'self' experiencing the emotions is a claim in thought coming afterwards. When the emotions are strong, this kind of discerning is much harder to do. But the truth seen in this discernment – that experiencing-now is always unitary — remains true.

No, a nonexistent thing cannot experience. Is there a self experiencing? All I can find is experiencing, and the deeply habitual momentum, the coming-afterward of believing and claiming this is due to a self, but I can't find the self that is supposed to be experiencing.

Where is this a strong experience happening? Conventional answer is 'in my body,' in my stomach particularly. But that's a habitual conceptual matrix placed over the experiencing in nowness, which is happening in indefinable/spaciousness comes somewhat close to naming it.

Neither 'me' nor 'a being in time' are existent. There is just what's happening now. And a worry thought: Am I just indulging in intellectualizing? Pausing with that thought and recognizing that what is being known here is actually outside thought's compass. Like yesterday, in that moment of terror in the woods, recognizing how over many years thought has kept this spaciousness safely confined, seemingly, behind my eyes — nothing of the kind is true, in reality.

I had read Neil's article in response to your original invitation, and I just reread it. I'm trying to stay close to direct experience. If I was always in direct experience this whole investigation would be over, wouldn't it? Because there's never anything other than experiencing now – except thought making stuff up. Making up a world and a me.

Touch my hair, as you suggest, then brush against my dog's hair. What makes this hair? Distinctive sensations, and a whole conceptual scheme interwoven with those sensations. Stringy soft material of my dog's bed is different sensations — my head, additional sensation of scalp; dog's body, additional sensation of warmth and living vibrancy; dog bed, different sensation, no living vibrancy, no 'self' sense of scalp.

Touch back of hand; sensations + conceptual scheme + sensing shape and features/knuckles/tendons = hand. 'My' hand? Elaborated sensation, some portion of which is interpreted as me, me from the inside — but it's entirely interpretation, isn't it? There's just sensation, being interpreted through this fantastically complex web of thoughts and images — but just sensation. It takes a lot of being present and slowing down with your questions and experiments to even get a glimpse of this, but it's so exciting when I do.

Sitting in chair, cannot distinguish chair and butt, just one sensation, 'my' chair or 'my' butt made out of thought interpreting sensation.

Thanks for your really close-in help, stalking nothingness!

Hi Glenn,

Good work. Lets focus on this

read Neil's article in response to your original invitation, and I just reread it. I'm trying to stay close to direct experience. If I was always in direct experience this whole investigation would be over, wouldn't it? Because there's never anything other than experie

Look very carefully. There is only direct experience.

EVERYTHING else is a story. Thoughts post direct experience come in and claim everything you said.

Is it so?

Find examples when this is not so.