The Gate

LU is focused guiding for seeing there is no real, inherent 'self' - what do you understand by this?
There is no fixed self, there never has been. I am a bundle of various habits which inform how I respond to my experience of the world. A self cannot exist as a separate entity, there is nothing that could make that possible. Self is an illusion and the word serves more as an aid to communication with others.

What are you looking for at LU?
I would welcome the opportunity to clearly look at my experience of self/no-self with the aid of a guide. I like questions that focus my attention and point to what I need to examine. I am up for honest inquiry and seeing clearly. In time I would like to link up with others who have done the same.

What do you expect from a guided conversation?
Being challenged, exploring what lies behind doubt, fear, resistance, anger, ambivalence, views, beliefs and so on. Finding truth within myself based upon my own experience. Having a dialogue which helps me see through unhelpful habits and trusting in the space of no-self and what may arise from that place.

What is your experience in terms of spiritual practices, seeking and inquiry?
Over 25 years' experience of Buddhist practice and study with a Buddhist organisation. Meditation, pujas, mantras, ethics, retreats. In all that time I have not formally practised inquiry into no-self even though it is at the core of all Buddhist teachings. Prior to that, in 1990 I had a serious road accident which nearly cost me my life. My experience during and after the accident was profound and completely changed my view and direction of my life. This led to a quest in search of meaning, hence getting involved with Buddhism. I am now 63.

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 do this inquiry with you. Before we start I wanna check in with you about two things:

1)

Please read the following documents from LU carefully and let me know if you have any questions, doubts or reserveations in regards to them:


http://liberationunleashed.com/disclaimer-2

And:

http://liberationunleashed.com/about/faq/#faq-1041

2)

I enjoy working with people who are highly motivated for this and want to do exercises/look at questions and stay in the corespondance more or less every day until we finish. This is not about making it rigidly so, exceptions (vacations, times where something else is called for, etc) are fine and in the end we will be guided by a flow beyond our decisions and imagination. So what I am checking in with here, is if this type of engagement feels right and is possible for you?

Hi Elad

Thank you for offering to do this inquiry with me, I appreciate that. I can confirm I have read the information in the two links you sent me, perfectly fine with me.

The type of engagement I have with you that you outlined looks good and is possible. To the best of my ability I will stay in contact with you daily. I feel genuine motivation to explore whatever comes up and respond to the exercises and questions you ask me.

Thank you

Great let's start.

Please watch this little video on using the quote function on the forum, to make our communication clear:

https://youtu.be/-fAToDNh9hQ?si=z_CWDFiEqh6qIcaC

When you answer my questions, quote them, and answer under the quotes.

And moving forward, please answer all questions in *blue*.

1) What may I call you?

2) Looking only to direct experience, not relying on any theory, doctrine or intellectual reasoning, is there a separate self, a doer, a controller, a chooser?

Thank you Elad, I will look at that link a bit later today so that I understand the practicalities of communicating with you.

For the purposes of this public forum please call me Julia.

That's a great question to start with. The sun is shining and I'm going to head out for a walk now, during which I will contemplate your question, along with notepad. Being out in nature helps me see more clearly. I will be heading up a hill with distant views, space and stillness.

I will get back to later this afternoon.

Looking only to direct experience, not relying on any theory, doctrine or intellectual reasoning, is there a separate self, a doer, a controller, a chooser?

No, there is no separate self, I cannot find one, pinpoint one. If a surgeon opened up my body from top to toe they wouldn’t find anything to suggest there is a separate, unique, personal, private, special separate self.

Soup was made this morning, who did that? Who chopped the vegetables and decided what to put in the pan? Who/what was animating this ‘bundle of habits’ to result in a lovely pan of soup?

How is it made without a doer, a controller or a chooser? I cannot find a doer, controller or chooser anywhere, they don’t exist, yet the soup is made. How does that happen?

I can see that it just happens without an identified doer, controller or chooser, but it’s a mighty puzzle because the soup doesn’t do itself.

Can I check – is it OK for me to include these extra questions as I explore more deeply? I often ask questions to myself to help me see more clearly, to dig down. Otherwise I will just stick to answering your questions more succinctly and I hear that you are not inviting theorizing, intellectual reasoning.

Thank you

Hi Julia!

Lovely. You are welcome to share the questions that emerge, feeling like the spontaneous continuation of the inquiry, the curiosity. The path will be shown to both of us as it unfolds.

You are asking how things happen without a separate self.

1) Do you need to know the answer for it to be clearly so?

2) Does the wind need a separate "winder" in order to blow? Does the river need a separate "riverer" in order to flow? Does mathematics and the fractal structures in nature need a separate "mathematiker" or "fractaler" in order to have it's beauty and structurual properties?

3) Where do thoughts come from? Where do they go? Do you control thoughts?

Make sure to answer each question from fresh looking/seeing, never just from memories of past insights or convictions.

Hi Julia!

Lovely. You are welcome to share the questions that emerge, feeling like the spontaneous continuation of the inquiry, the curiosity. The path will be shown to both of us as it unfolds.

You are asking how things happen without a separate self.

1) Do you need to know the answer for it to be clearly so?

2) Does the wind need a separate "winder" in order to blow? Does the river need a separate "riverer" in order to flow? Does mathematics and the fractal structures in nature need a separate "mathematiker" or "fractaler" in order to have it's beauty and structurual properties?

3) Where do thoughts come from? Where do they go? Do you control thoughts?

Make sure to answer each question from fresh looking/seeing, never just from memories of past insights or convictions.

Hi Elad

Thank you for encouraging me to post my own questions as I follow this inquiry. There are more below!

1) Do you need to know the answer for it to be clearly so?

Good question, no I don’t need to know the answer. I have spent much of my working life as a problem solver and I am rather nosey. I am also absolutely fine with unknowns too and like the idea that I don’t need to know how things happen without a separate self. I can sit with that with a sense of amusement and lightness.

2) Does the wind need a separate "winder" in order to blow? Does the river need a separate "riverer" in order to flow? Does mathematics and the fractal structures in nature need a separate "mathematiker" or "fractaler" in order to have its beauty and structural properties?

This made me laugh! I hadn’t thought about things in that way before. When you put it like that it is a ridiculous notion that there has to be a separate entity to make anything happen. I can trust in the truth of this as long as I suspend my nosiness.

Still reflecting upon ‘choice’ - choices can be intelligent, measured, neutral or harmful (yes, labels) for example. Wind just does its wind thing without making choices. Wind can dry washing nicely or demolish whole communities. ‘I’ can weigh up and choose actions which don’t demolish anything but may result in positive outcomes. Who/what is being discerning here? If there is no separate entity doing this then again I need to trust in the process and drop the desire to know how this happens. Letting go is necessary here I think.

3) Where do thoughts come from? Where do they go? Do you control thoughts?

Thoughts are random, come from nowhere and go nowhere. It’s like the brain is a big thought machine relentlessly churning thoughts out in no particular order. A second thought can come before the first one is complete, there is often no completion of any thoughts, no beginning, middle or end. Such a strange phenomenon, and highly distracting, especially in the middle of the night. I have no control over thoughts whatsoever, at least the emerging of them. Once I label ‘thought’ it tends to dissipate, lose its power, go. However, I am well used to thinking things through, things that need to be thought through, analysed, I type them up, put them in spreadsheets, ponder them, amazing things arise out of them after careful consideration. They seem less random, they are more focused, balanced, effective, insightful. Are these different kind of thoughts? I can’t see how my life could function without using my thought faculty in this manner. That said, I do really see that thoughts are empty of any kind of self or entity that creates, steers and disposes of them.

The soonest I can respond to you again will be sometime after 2pm tomorrow, Tuesday 15th Oct. Thank you for your quick replies and helpful questions.

Julia,this great, looking with simplicity and just allowing for whatever questions come up, to show where inquiry needs to go.

Still reflecting upon ‘choice’ - choices can be intelligent, measured, neutral or harmful (yes, labels) for example. Wind just does its wind thing without making choices. Wind can dry washing nicely or demolish whole communities. ‘I’ can weigh up and choose actions which don’t demolish anything but may result in positive outcomes. Who/what is being discerning here?

Choosing happens. Discerning happens. Creative and analytical thought happens. Even training and skill development happens. We are not gonna try and unsee any of that. We are just looking to see if any of that is ultimately driven by a separate self or needs a separate self. Don't try to figure it out - look.

1) Allow for a few numbers and nouns to come up (here is an example: 17, 12, green, summer, desert). Now do it a bunch of times. Look closely, where do these numbers and nouns come from? Even if they seem associated or habitual, what choose that association in that moment? Even if they seem "typical for you" what choose that exactly this pattern will come up and be taken to be typical for you?

2) Solve this problem 3 times 12 times 7 min 2 times one. Notice: How does it happen? When the mind analyzes, asks questions that bring clarity, or uses a method - what makes those questions, understandings, methods, come up?

3) Concentrate on the mantra Aum for a couple of minutes. Do it now! Before reading further...! What djfghjorfjwildjqwldjqwkfjiejqdojfwe (; what chose to follow the instruction or not? What controls how attention stays on the task or not. What exactly controls how it functions NOW, any self there, controlling attention? Do another round of mantra concentration and see what controls attention, any self/controller/"attentioner"?

If there is no separate entity doing this then again I need to trust in the process and drop the desire to know how this happens. Letting go is necessary here I think.

Control cannot let go of control. Thought cannot go beyond thought. Confusion cannot be clarity, but confusion seen as confusion IS clarity. A self that does not exist, has no responsibility or control over when clarity and conviction dawns.

On a more emotional level: Is there a fear associated with not knowing how everything work, where things come from, what controls things, or what a "something" that controls things would even mean? Is there a belief that knowledge of how things work most be there for life to be life, for whatever is clear to be clear, what ever is known to be known, whatever is unclear to be unclear?

However, I am well used to thinking things through, things that need to be thought through, analysed, I type them up, put them in spreadsheets, ponder them, amazing things arise out of them after careful consideration. They seem less random, they are more focused, balanced, effective, insightful. Are these different kind of thoughts? I can’t see how my life could function without using my thought faculty in this manner. That said, I do really see that thoughts are empty of any kind of self or entity that creates, steers and disposes of them.

Right so on a "relative level" as some Buddhists say, we discern between helpful and unhelpful thoughts, balanced and unbalanced mind states, wholesome and unwholesome sentiments and intentions, skilfulness and unskilfulness, etc. We are not here to question the usefulness of that on a relative level. We are only here to LOOK if any of that - skillful or unskilful, etc - is in any way driven, controlled or chosen BY A SEPARATE SELF.

The soonest I can respond to you again will be sometime after 2pm tomorrow, Tuesday 15th Oct. Thank you for your quick replies and helpful questions.

Thank you for the head-up. Look forward to hear from you again.

Julia,this great, looking with simplicity and just allowing for whatever questions come up, to show where inquiry needs to go.

Still reflecting upon ‘choice’ - choices can be intelligent, measured, neutral or harmful (yes, labels) for example. Wind just does its wind thing without making choices. Wind can dry washing nicely or demolish whole communities. ‘I’ can weigh up and choose actions which don’t demolish anything but may result in positive outcomes. Who/what is being discerning here?

Choosing happens. Discerning happens. Creative and analytical thought happens. Even training and skill development happens. We are not gonna try and unsee any of that. We are just looking to see if any of that is ultimately driven by a separate self or needs a separate self. Don't try to figure it out - look.

1) Allow for a few numbers and nouns to come up (here is an example: 17, 12, green, summer, desert). Now do it a bunch of times. Look closely, where do these numbers and nouns come from? Even if they seem associated or habitual, what choose that association in that moment? Even if they seem "typical for you" what choose that exactly this pattern will come up and be taken to be typical for you?

2) Solve this problem 3 times 12 times 7 min 2 times one. Notice: How does it happen? When the mind analyzes, asks questions that bring clarity, or uses a method - what makes those questions, understandings, methods, come up?

3) Concentrate on the mantra Aum for a couple of minutes. Do it now! Before reading further...! What djfghjorfjwildjqwldjqwkfjiejqdojfwe (; what chose to follow the instruction or not? What controls how attention stays on the task or not. What exactly controls how it functions NOW, any self there, controlling attention? Do another round of mantra concentration and see what controls attention, any self/controller/"attentioner"?

If there is no separate entity doing this then again I need to trust in the process and drop the desire to know how this happens. Letting go is necessary here I think.

Control cannot let go of control. Thought cannot go beyond thought. Confusion cannot be clarity, but confusion seen as confusion IS clarity. A self that does not exist, has no responsibility or control over when clarity and conviction dawns.

On a more emotional level: Is there a fear associated with not knowing how everything work, where things come from, what controls things, or what a "something" that controls things would even mean? Is there a belief that knowledge of how things work most be there for life to be life, for whatever is clear to be clear, what ever is known to be known, whatever is unclear to be unclear?

However, I am well used to thinking things through, things that need to be thought through, analysed, I type them up, put them in spreadsheets, ponder them, amazing things arise out of them after careful consideration. They seem less random, they are more focused, balanced, effective, insightful. Are these different kind of thoughts? I can’t see how my life could function without using my thought faculty in this manner. That said, I do really see that thoughts are empty of any kind of self or entity that creates, steers and disposes of them.

Right so on a "relative level" as some Buddhists say, we discern between helpful and unhelpful thoughts, balanced and unbalanced mind states, wholesome and unwholesome sentiments and intentions, skilfulness and unskilfulness, etc. We are not here to question the usefulness of that on a relative level. We are only here to LOOK if any of that - skillful or unskilful, etc - is in any way driven, controlled or chosen BY A SEPARATE SELF.

The soonest I can respond to you again will be sometime after 2pm tomorrow, Tuesday 15th Oct. Thank you for your quick replies and helpful questions.

Thank you for the head-up. Look forward to hear from you again.

Many thanks for your very helpful responses and questions Elad, it has taken me a little time to reflect. Here goes ...

Choosing happens. Discerning happens. Creative and analytical thought happens. Even training and skill development happens. We are not gonna try and unsee any of that. We are just looking to see if any of that is ultimately driven by a separate self or needs a separate self. Don't try to figure it out - look.

OK, I think I’m getting this. There is happening which is not driven by a separate entity, it just is. I have looked for what might drive the choosing and discerning and can’t find anything.

1) Allow for a few numbers and nouns to come up (here is an example: 17, 12, green, summer, desert). Now do it a bunch of times. Look closely, where do these numbers and nouns come from? Even if they seem associated or habitual, what choose that association in that moment? Even if they seem "typical for you" what choose that exactly this pattern will come up and be taken to be typical for you?

They are just labels, they have come from my mind which needs labels to make sense of the world. I see that labels are necessary to form constructs, verbal, mental or physical. If they are associated – eg. blue sky, hungry dog, 3 apples, they are not fixed entities in themselves and my mind/brain chooses that association from previous conditioning/learning/experience/habit. Whenever I see my birth date, for example, say in the media, connected to someone else, I experience a little buzz and think ‘that’s my birthday!’, so would that be an example of ‘typical for me’? If there is no 'me' then the association with 'me' when seeing my birth date comes only from the habitual mind? The date associated with the day this bundle was born. I hope I have understood your question correctly.

2) Solve this problem 3 times 12 times 7 min 2 times one. Notice: How does it happen? When the mind analyzes, asks questions that bring clarity, or uses a method - what makes those questions, understandings, methods, come up?

Solutions of this kind come from repetitive actions based on a given formula and with prior learning. I take my calculator, press in the numbers and mathematical symbols and get an answer. It’s failsafe if I press the buttons in the right order. It’s learned behaviour, formulaic, predictable. 'I' am not involved, there is no 'I'.

3) Concentrate on the mantra Aum for a couple of minutes. Do it now! Before reading further...! What djfghjorfjwildjqwldjqwkfjiejqdojfwe (; what chose to follow the instruction or not? What controls how attention stays on the task or not. What exactly controls how it functions NOW, any self there, controlling attention? Do another round of mantra concentration and see what controls attention, any self/controller/"attentioner"?

A sense of compliance led to me choosing to follow the instruction, it’s what you asked me to do, there was no resistance. Like a command perhaps, it resulted in an Aum. As I was chanting Aum my mind quietened and I enjoyed the simplicity of it. Attention stayed on the task until a thought appeared and then passed, after which attention was focused on the Aum again. Chanting the Aum helped keep thoughts at bay. I couldn’t see any form of control being exerted. It felt like a penny was put in the slot and an Aum happened. No self there controlling attention or making it happen, the Aum was just happening. No, there was no self/controller/’attentioner’. But who stopped the Aum? Maybe the Aum just stopped, just was.

A self that does not exist, has no responsibility or control over when clarity and conviction dawns.

Ah ha, this is about relinquishing any false sense of control that I think I have over anything. Clarity and conviction arise independently of any controlling factor, they just arise.

On a more emotional level: Is there a fear associated with not knowing how everything work, where things come from, what controls things, or what a "something" that controls things would even mean? Is there a belief that knowledge of how things work most be there for life to be life, for whatever is clear to be clear, what ever is known to be known, whatever is unclear to be unclear?

Great question! The answer to this is a bit mixed. I’ll start with the physical then talk about the emotional. I guess I’ve been a ‘Mrs Fix It’. For example, I took every moving part off my clarinet when I was about 13, laid it all at the bottom of my bed in the right order. Cleaned it all up, put it back together again, learned how it worked. I used to build computers right from taking the motherboard out of a plastic bag, stuck the whole thing together and networked the darn things with hundreds of others. Fixing this stuff required knowing exactly how it was put together. So knowing how things worked helped me fix them, that was my job and I was (less so now) genuinely interested and curious.

On an emotional level I learned very early on not to show too much vulnerability for fear of humiliation, manipulation, all sorts of mind games etc. I learned to be assertive and to be clear with others to avoid being hurt. These habits run deep and as I type this and reflect upon it, in the context of no-self, I can ask myself ‘who am I wanting to protect?’, ‘who gets hurt?’. So fear of potential discomfort, terror, panic, loss of control contributed to strategies I developed to ‘protect myself’, including a level of perceived control over my environment. I ask myself ‘so if there is no self, and no one to get hurt, no one to protect, how does one conduct oneself in situations where a kind of verbal attack or manipulation may occur?’. This is a real question relating to real life examples, still current. Outside of those particular events in my life I am actually quite laid back and content, often find myself laughing and chuckling as I explore no-self, feeling light.

Right so on a "relative level" as some Buddhists say, we discern between helpful and unhelpful thoughts, balanced and unbalanced mind states, wholesome and unwholesome sentiments and intentions, skilfulness and unskilfulness, etc. We are not here to question the usefulness of that on a relative level. We are only here to LOOK if any of that - skillful or unskilful, etc - is in any way driven, controlled or chosen BY A SEPARATE SELF.

That’s helpful, so here we are going beyond the relative level of say ethical conduct per se and seeing that it’s not a separate self that drives or controls it. It is not ethics on a personal level, ‘my ethical practice’. I hadn’t thought about it like that before.

Thank you Elad for taking the time to read what I have written, I hope it makes sense.

They are just labels, they have come from my mind which needs labels to make sense of the world. I see that labels are necessary to form constructs, verbal, mental or physical. If they are associated – eg. blue sky, hungry dog, 3 apples, they are not fixed entities in themselves and my mind/brain chooses that association from previous conditioning/learning/experience/habit. Whenever I see my birth date, for example, say in the media, connected to someone else, I experience a little buzz and think ‘that’s my birthday!’, so would that be an example of ‘typical for me’? If there is no 'me' then the association with 'me' when seeing my birth date comes only from the habitual mind? The date associated with the day this bundle was born. I hope I have understood your question correctly.

The only thing that is really important to SEE here is that the processes are spontaneous without a separate self, without a doer or a chooser.

Is that clear to you?

Solutions of this kind come from repetitive actions based on a given formula and with prior learning. I take my calculator, press in the numbers and mathematical symbols and get an answer. It’s failsafe if I press the buttons in the right order. It’s learned behaviour, formulaic, predictable. 'I' am not involved, there is no 'I'.

So there is no separate self, ever, and never will be. Is it true beyond doubt?

But who stopped the Aum? Maybe the Aum just stopped, just was.

Only thing you need to see clearly is that there is no separate self doing it. Beyond that we can have helpful theories or explanation models on the relative level. And we are aware that on the ultimate level it is a mystery.

Is that clear?

Great question! The answer to this is a bit mixed. I’ll start with the physical then talk about the emotional. I guess I’ve been a ‘Mrs Fix It’. For example, I took every moving part off my clarinet when I was about 13, laid it all at the bottom of my bed in the right order. Cleaned it all up, put it back together again, learned how it worked. I used to build computers right from taking the motherboard out of a plastic bag, stuck the whole thing together and networked the darn things with hundreds of others. Fixing this stuff required knowing exactly how it was put together. So knowing how things worked helped me fix them, that was my job and I was (less so now) genuinely interested and curious.

That's lovely and useful on a relative level. And we just see that none of it equals a separate self or an explanation of the ultimate nature of reality, which can only be experienced, not explained or rationally fixed.

Is that clear?

On an emotional level I learned very early on not to show too much vulnerability for fear of humiliation, manipulation, all sorts of mind games etc. I learned to be assertive and to be clear with others to avoid being hurt. These habits run deep and as I type this and reflect upon it, in the context of no-self, I can ask myself ‘who am I wanting to protect?’, ‘who gets hurt?’. So fear of potential discomfort, terror, panic, loss of control contributed to strategies I developed to ‘protect myself’, including a level of perceived control over my environment. I ask myself ‘so if there is no self, and no one to get hurt, no one to protect, how does one conduct oneself in situations where a kind of verbal attack or manipulation may occur?’. This is a real question relating to real life examples, still current. Outside of those particular events in my life I am actually quite laid back and content, often find myself laughing and chuckling as I explore no-self, feeling light.

Vulnerability happens, defense mechanisms happen, the unlearning of rigid defense mechanism and development of more flexible and mature ways of functioning happen. All without a separate self.

Is that clear? Any questions to this?

How does it feel to see that there is no separate self to protect?

:)

The only thing that is really important to SEE here is that the processes are spontaneous without a separate self, without a doer or a chooser.

Is that clear to you?

Yes, when I stop thinking about it and just experience my experience, I see this. I like the term ‘the processes are spontaneous’, I recognise it.

So there is no separate self, ever, and never will be. Is it true beyond doubt?

Yes I see this. My life story is simply a story, my bundle has been moving through the world without a separate self shaping its present or future, or solidifying its past.

Only thing you need to see clearly is that there is no separate self doing it. Beyond that we can have helpful theories or explanation models on the relative level. And we are aware that on the ultimate level it is a mystery.

Is that clear?

The notion that on the ultimate level it is a mystery is not completely new to me, I am comfortable with that and value the mystery.

That's lovely and useful on a relative level. And we just see that none of it equals a separate self or an explanation of the ultimate nature of reality, which can only be experienced, not explained or rationally fixed.

Is that clear?

A sense of relief arises when I absorb your comment. There is no need to find a rational explanation, it serves no purpose, there IS NO explanation, just experience.

Vulnerability happens, defense mechanisms happen, the unlearning of rigid defense mechanism and development of more flexible and mature ways of functioning happen. All without a separate self.

Is that clear? Any questions to this?

A: Yes I can accept that, I have lived experience of more flexible and mature ways of functioning, this is already happening.

How does it feel to see that there is no separate self to protect?

A: I laughed out loud! I know it. And in my experience, when I replace ‘self’ protection with kindness, listening, openness, just ‘being with’ a ‘difficult’ person, the effect can be transformative. It is not ‘me’ that is doing it, it is kindness, listening, openness.

Can I take the liberty of sending you something I wrote during and after a meditation/sit I had on 13/10/24 when I was exploring no-self? I know you haven’t asked me for this, I wondered if it might be another window into where I seem to be at. I haven’t edited it since we have been communicating.

Meditation 13/10/24

Seeing the stillness in the eye of the storm.

Experiencing the freedom from what is not, dropping the burden of the role.

Experiencing the flow of life outside of time and space, dropping those concepts.

The objects on my shrine are all fingers pointing to what is. They have no inherent power.

No self doesn’t mean being dead. Quite the opposite. An experience of being alive to life, no blockages, no walls, no defences, no pushing or pulling. No self allows for a space for life to just happen.

Laughing with the joy of seeing through delusion.

Relief at the lifting of the burden of the need to build a persona to fit into the world.

Tears on recognising the huge efforts that have been made in keeping the illusion buoyant.

Tears at the seeing of how much the illusion of self causes suffering, my own and others.

Immense gratitude to be able to sit in the stillness and peace of what is. Joy arising. Groundedness. Body awareness, sensations as I sit on my meditation stool. Just seeing, just thinking, just hearing, just smelling (the incense).

No more clinging, no more engineering, no more walls, no more futile attempts a being somebody. Trusting in the process of life simply flowing, no self required.

It (the dropping of illusion) changes nothing and it changes everything. No fear is felt whatsoever.

Letting go of clinging, ‘this is enough’. Enough. Seeing the pitfalls of being a ‘spiritual consumer’ – the books, the teachings, the gurus, the mantras, the beliefs, the institutions, the belief that ‘I’m not good enough’. Dropping, surrendering, being at peace with what is. Just this.

Nowhere else to go. And no medals or applause, just this. Laughter.

This needs to be a lived experience, responding to the world with truth, no role. With clarity and awareness, kindness and compassion. Noticing when old habits cloud what is. Letting them go.

Life is full, rich, vibrant, is energy. Almost electric, amazing, astounding, moving, flowing, coursing, and really doesn’t care about any notions of self, attempts at being controlled, re-directed, tamed, manipulated. Oh no! Life just is, it does its thing, fresh, it has no mind, thoughts cannot touch or change it. Life is, that’s all.

Spontaneous chuckling. Laughing at any notion of my self-importance. A coming home, comfortable.

END

Thank you so much Elad for your continuing guidance, I really appreciate you hanging in there with me.

Wow - beautiful!! Thank you for sharing that.

So, if someone came to you right now and said: You have not seen that there is no self, this is not true seeing!

What happens? What reactions, thoughts, feelings?