The Gate

Part 2:

Take something cold from the fridge – like a can of cooldrink. When you touch the can, what does more accurately describe your experience:
a. Your fingers feeling cold because of touching a cold can; or
b. Coldness - sensation labelled “cold”? With eyes closed, where does the cold appear? Observe the order in which the details appear

b. sensation and then a label. if the thought/label is ignored then it is directly experienced once more as sensation

Pay attention only to the feeling of your body. Just notice the pure sensations, without relying on thoughts or mental images. Keep your eyes closed and look:
Can it be known how tall the body is?

no

Does the body have a weight or volume?

no

In the actual experience does the body have a shape or a form?

no

Is there a boundary between the body and the chair?

no

At the point where your body contacts the chair, are there two things there, a body and chair, or one, sensation?

sensation only

Is it "my" body, or is it just a body?

with eyes closed it doesn’t seem like either, it isn’t my body and ‘a body’ is a label for an object which does not seem relevant, just a direct experience of spaciousness plus movement

Is there an inside or an outside?

no, no boundaries, at first there is a thought that sounds not initiating from the label body are coming from the label ‘outside’ but this is only a thought and cannot be confirmed by DE

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to?

a visual experience of color/form/object which is lost with eyes closed. with eyes closed there is nothing that this label refers to

What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

spaciousness and presence/raw experience

Can the 'body' do things?

Look very carefully, especially with the last question. You can look several times during the day while doing other things (like washing hands, showering, walking, lying down, etc) before replying.

not with eyes closed, no. was this supposed to be done also with eyes open throughout the day? Please clarify if so.

Becca

Hi Becca

There is a lot of resistance today. Sending this first part so that there is some action and momentum despite that constant thought to not do.

Resistance is good and part of the process. It means that some deeply-rooted beliefs have been challenged :)

Let’s leave part 2 for now and focus on part 1 questions. We’ll come back to part 2 after all is cleared in part 1

Seeing tissue, simply= colour (seeing)

Great! Keep them coming, but remember they have to be reports not a thought exercise :)

Not an entity. But the direct experience coming into focus as according to the example above

How is “focus” experienced in DE? Describe it through the 5 senses. Remember all you have is the 5 senses and thinking. Whatever is not in the first 5 is a thought. How is focus different from labelling?

Cannot describe it, has no form. It is what the 5 senses perceive.

If it is indescribable what makes it different from thought/assumption/abstraction? Do the senses perceive? Can seeing see or hear? Can thinking see or feel? …What does the seeing, hearing, thinking,…? Is there an outside environment to be perceived through the senses?

Aware-ing always is, but the direct experience is lessened/hampered when the mind starts labeling aware-ing and thoughts draw focus.

Please describe this better. Is DE a special mode of seeing? Also what is “mind” and how is it observed?

The thoughts themselves can appear and disappear in awareing but the content does not. For example: my thoughts right now are expressing the theory that this line of questioning is a circle with no destination. When that thinking is happening/pursued the aware-ing of body on couch, fingers on keyboard etc goes out of focus.

How are thoughts appearing in aware-ing? Does it have borders/limits? What is it made of? Is it transparent or it has colour? If it is transparent how is it known that is there and thoughts appear in it? There is just thinking – mental images, concepts, etc. Are you going to tell me next that aware-ing is like the screen that the movie appears…
That is why I asked you to leave all knowledge behind – spiritual (non-dualism/Advaita Vedanta) or scientific…

I know this is not direct experience, but aware-ing happens in the dream state, which is without objects so yes.

How do you know this then if you cannot DE it – is it learned/thought? How is the dream state experienced in DE?
1. If there is nothing to be experienced (“deep sleep”), how then it is known that there is awareness to experience it? Or are there only memories/thoughts of going to sleep and deduction/assumption that there must have been a conscious experience (a story)? Is there time in DE? What are memories and how are they different from any other thought? WHEN are memories happening – now or yesterday,...?
Can you have an awareness of no experience? How can that be observed? Doesn’t it mean that awareness has to split itself in awareness and not-awareness to observe itself?
Is the experience of no experience possible?
Even in the deepest meditation, there are subtle sensations – aliveness, breathing, heartbeat - very subtle but still present. Even spaciousness is experienced as sensations - sensations include anything that is sensed, such as touching a cup or a feeling of expansiveness. True nothingness means absolutely nothing. So if there are no sensations and there is nothingness, that's often a subtle thought that is trying to create something out of thin air. You can call it aliveness, presence or I AM, but all of these are labels, are they not? Is there anything here that is not the senses and thinking?

2. Otherwise if there are dreams – mental images and storytelling – there is thinking. How is the presence of thinking proving the existence of awareness?

It seems like you are trying to replace self with a SELF, witness or experiencer. They are used as a stepping stone in spirituality, but eventually they have to be seen for what they are.
Maybe this video could be helpful:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Lm3G0_ ... ex=17&t=8s

Can there be objects without awareness?

If a tree falls in the forest... haha
Staying with direct experience, no there cannot be.

First of all are there objects of awareness?
Can you separate seeing from the seen or thinking from the thought,…? Look at your screen right now. Is it outside of seeing it? Or the screen is a label for seeing (verb as in flux)? Do you see a border between thinking the thought and the thought? Or hearing a sound and the sound?
Let’s look even deeper… Can you see a border between seeing and thinking, and/or hearing? Do they happen in a different “place”/”area” in “aware-ing”?

Everything feels very much on thin ice right now, tenuous. Like 'I' am looking right at something but cannot see it because it doesn't exist but still there is pretending that it does.

Keep looking! Dig deeper! You are doing great!
Love
Rali

Hello,

How is “focus” experienced in DE? Describe it through the 5 senses. Remember all you have is the 5 senses and thinking. Whatever is not in the first 5 is a thought. How is focus different from labelling?

DE is continually changing. The coffee exercise examples over the past few days are each different. So focus to me wouldn't be a label it would be DE being different over time I guess. But time is a thought that doesn't exist in DE. So no idea how to answer this.

Cannot describe it, has no form. It is what the 5 senses perceive.

If it is indescribable what makes it different from thought/assumption/abstraction?

Good point. It isn't different then.

Do the senses perceive?

Right now there are tears coming. Frustration. Confusion. Anger.

So here:
Seeing blurry, simply= colour (seeing)
Smelling nothing (unable to smell), simply = smell (smelling)
Feeling energy in arms, simply = sensation (feeling)
Tasting salt, simply = taste (tasting)
Hearing loud hum, sniffling, simply = sound (hearing)
Thought about frustration, simply = thought (thinking)

Coming back to the question. No answer for it, just anger and sadness emerging. If they did perceive it would imply a perceiver and there is no perceiver so... ???

Can seeing see or hear?

No.

Can thinking see or feel?

No

…What does the seeing, hearing, thinking,…?

Noone and nothing.

Is there an outside environment to be perceived through the senses?

no. Inside and outside it all one.

Aware-ing always is, but the direct experience is lessened/hampered when the mind starts labeling aware-ing and thoughts draw focus.

Please describe this better. Is DE a special mode of seeing?

No. Just staring at this and it is meaningless colors. All meaningless. Cannot understand the question. Trying to look but not seeing, is just thought on top of thought on top of thought.

Also what is “mind” and how is it observed?

Mind is a thought.. a thought that puts together all the thoughts. Thought is observed by direct experience of thought existing but mind cannot be observed. So it doesn't exist either.

The thoughts themselves can appear and disappear in awareing but the content does not. For example: my thoughts right now are expressing the theory that this line of questioning is a circle with no destination. When that thinking is happening/pursued the aware-ing of body on couch, fingers on keyboard etc goes out of focus.

How are thoughts appearing in aware-ing?

Subtly, stealthy, so there can be identification and not questioning.

Does it have borders/limits?

Often happens after a DE as a label. No borders.

What is it made of?

The experience of the content is sometimes one of sound. A voice. But there is no real sound that can be experienced by aware-ing. It is all a thought. So made of nothing.

Is it transparent or it has colour?

No color. Just sometimes the thought of color. But there is no actual color to DE.

If it is transparent how is it known that is there and thoughts appear in it?

It cannot be known.

There is just thinking – mental images, concepts, etc. Are you going to tell me next that aware-ing is like the screen that the movie appears…
That is why I asked you to leave all knowledge behind – spiritual (non-dualism/Advaita Vedanta) or scientific…

If this is sneaking in it is not intentional.

I know this is not direct experience, but aware-ing happens in the dream state, which is without objects so yes.

How do you know this then if you cannot DE it – is it learned/thought?

yes

How is the dream state experienced in DE?

Don't know. It cannot be. Because any communication of what potentially was experienced would be after the fact and not direct experience.

1. If there is nothing to be experienced (“deep sleep”), how then it is known that there is awareness to experience it?

It cannot be known. Only learned/thought.

Or are there only memories/thoughts of going to sleep and deduction/assumption that there must have been a conscious experience (a story)?

Yes. Story.

Is there time in DE?

No. This is what is circling around in trying to communicate anything right now. Right now pounding in chest, more tears, burning sensation in eyes.

What are memories and how are they different from any other thought?

They aren't different, memories are thoughts. Maybe more sneaky or compelling (?) because originally there was direct experience but then it just becomes a thought.

WHEN are memories happening – now or yesterday,...?

Memories are the content of thoughts happening now.

Can you have an awareness of no experience?

No.

How can that be observed?

If there is actually no experience to DE it cannot be.

Doesn’t it mean that awareness has to split itself in awareness and not-awareness to observe itself?

haha, exactly

Is the experience of no experience possible?

No

Even in the deepest meditation, there are subtle sensations – aliveness, breathing, heartbeat - very subtle but still present. Even spaciousness is experienced as sensations - sensations include anything that is sensed, such as touching a cup or a feeling of expansiveness. True nothingness means absolutely nothing. So if there are no sensations and there is nothingness, that's often a subtle thought that is trying to create something out of thin air. You can call it aliveness, presence or I AM, but all of these are labels, are they not?

It is all a thought trying to explain and label, yes.

Is there anything here that is not the senses and thinking?

no

2. Otherwise if there are dreams – mental images and storytelling – there is thinking. How is the presence of thinking proving the existence of awareness?

Confused, not able to experience this question without thinking. Looking....

Argh. so can’t find an answer without thinking.

It seems like you are trying to replace self with a SELF, witness or experiencer. They are used as a stepping stone in spirituality, but eventually they have to be seen for what they are.
Maybe this video could be helpful:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Lm3G0_ ... ex=17&t=8s

YES HELPFUL. Was definitely doing this.

First of all are there objects of awareness? Can you separate seeing from the seen or thinking from the thought,…?

No in DE it seeing can’t be separated from seen so there are no objects just labels after the fact. Thinking/thought is harder to separate because the content of the thoughts starts in when looking…

Feeling ‘tired’, thoughts of needing to sleep. Now. Ridiculous.

Look at your screen right now. Is it outside of seeing it? Or the screen is a label for seeing (verb as in flux)?

Yes, not sure what verb as in flux means but am following the rest. Light and shadow, color, it does not exist outside of seeing and screen is a label.

Do you see a border between thinking the thought and the thought?

no

Or hearing a sound and the sound?

no border.

Let’s look even deeper… Can you see a border between seeing and thinking, and/or hearing? Do they happen in a different “place”/”area” in “aware-ing”?

hmmm… it is all one input/experience. no border. just separating by 5 senses in practice. even with eyes closes there is ‘blackness’ experienced while hearing the wind and feeling the breeze. the ‘ears’ ‘eyes’ etc are just labels.

Keep looking! Dig deeper! You are doing great!

Feel a bunch of DE things right now that are labeled terrible.
Tears, sensations with the label anger.

Thank you for bearing with this process.
Becca

Hi Becca

You are doing great! :)

hmmm… it is all one input/experience. no border. just separating by 5 senses in practice. even with eyes closes there is ‘blackness’ experienced while hearing the wind and feeling the breeze. the ‘ears’ ‘eyes’ etc are just labels.

YES!!! It is inseparable seeing_hearing_smelling_tasting_feeling_thinking or just THIS/what IS. “Seeing” and the rest are also labels – DE labels – describing THIS. I like THIS as it is a word that just points without further elaboration. However, as long as their empty nature is seen through, labels are important in communication. DE labels help to describe reality without too much story and help to see all unchecked beliefs…

So focus to me wouldn't be a label it would be DE being different over time I guess. But time is a thought that doesn't exist in DE. So no idea how to answer this.

How is it known that DE is different without the labels? Is it different? It always IS. Only thought comes to say this wasn’t like that 5 min ago or a second ago. Is there a change without anything being isolated and followed as “it” progresses?
It's like looking at a lava lamp. The wax may seem to change shape, and the shapes it seems to take may seem to be present one moment, and absent the next. But all that is known is the wax. Nothing actually changed and nothing was ever born or lost, although it may have seemed to. Time and change are one of the most challenging concepts to see through clearly. We can look at time a bit further later if you want.
But…:

They aren't different, memories are thoughts. Maybe more sneaky or compelling (?) because originally there was direct experience but then it just becomes a thought

How is it known that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened? Is it because thought says so? Is there an archive that you can go and check old experiences?

Back to "focus"… Focus on focusing, attention itself. Do you move it, or it moves by itself?

Hold focus on breath - see how it moves to thoughts, sensations, feelings, sounds. Is this something you control? What moves attention? What exactly is it made of? Is it like a torch that lights up things sitting in the dark, choosing which one to light up? Or “things” are just appearing like that?
Look deeper! If there is no separation between thinking, seeing, hearing… (without the DE labels) how then can you “focus” on them? Or “focusing” is the mental separation into “things”, aka labelling/thinking?

Mind is a thought.. a thought that puts together all the thoughts.

Can a thought do anything but description/labelling? Can a thought think and organise other thoughts? Or this is just an anthropomorphism, like in language when you say the “grass is growing” (Is the grass growing itself?)? Are there separate thoughts with visual outlines showing where one thoughts end and the other starts (not looking at content)? Are there separate thoughts or just thinking? By “verb as a flux” I meant that a verb better describes the nature of reality as it is in a constant flux :)

Right now pounding in chest, more tears, burning sensation in eyes.

Right now there are tears coming. Frustration. Confusion. Anger.

No answer for it, just anger and sadness emerging.

Feel a bunch of DE things right now that are labeled terrible.
Tears, sensations with the label anger.

Thank you for sharing! Like I said, it is quite normal to experience that. At the end of the day we are turning your “world” upside down :). As the world (your world) is a projection of your thoughts, there is great value in becoming aware of unconscious bias and habitual suffering. “Your world,” the totality of your experience of all that is happening, is a creation of language, and words are the building blocks that create the story about it.
So let’s look!
Emotion = sensation + thought
Let’s look at ‘anger’. You can do this exercise with any emotions.

When ‘anger’ appears, close your eyes and do the following:

1) Look at the label/thought ‘anger’ itself. See the label/word ‘anger’ as a typewritten word

Does the label ‘anger’ know anything about anger, or is the word just a bunch of letters?
Is the label ‘anger’ itself angry?
Can you find anyone/anything in the word itself that is angry?

2) Then look at the sensation and ignore everything else but the sensation itself.
Inquire into the sensation and ask if the sensation itself knows anything about ‘anger’.

Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is ‘anger’ or that it is angry?
Can you find anyone or anything within or behind the sensation that is angry?

If other random mental images appear during the noticing of the sensation, check to see if those images are the self who is angry, or are they images that are simply arising and subsiding?

Did you find anyone or anything that is angry?

When you have done this and if no one/no thing is found, then just sit with the sensation. Just breathe normally, notice the thoughts and images that appear and let them pass on by unless they seem to hang around, then do the appropriate steps above. Allow the sensation all the room it needs without pushing it aside or judging it. If it becomes too intense just take a couple of deep breaths into the sensation itself, and then notice the floor under your feet, notice your backside on the chair and then notice what is in the room you are sitting in and name them out loud, while being aware of the sensation and remember to breathe normally. If the sensation does not dissipate at all or only dissipates a little, that is okay, just notice it, without doing anything with it and just go about your day.

We are not trying to get rid of the sensation labelled ‘anger’ or the arising thoughts or images. We are only LOOKING to see what is actually appearing (i.e. thought, sensation, colour/image) as opposed to what thought is saying ABOUT what actually IS. Freedom comes from allowing whatever appears to appear without the need for it to be different or to leave.
Just a recap:
The label ‘anger’ is the DE of thought and not the DE of anger
The sensation labelled ‘anger’ is the DE of sensation and not the DE of anger
The colour labelled ‘me/I/body’ is the DE of colour and not the AE of anger
The thoughts ABOUT anger - what it is, does etc are DE of thought and not DE of anger

So, is there actual experience of ‘anger’ or what is actually appearing (DE) is label + sensation + colour + thoughts ABOUT anger? Label ‘anger’ is known and thoughts about ‘anger’ are known, however, is ‘anger’ actually known?
Let me know how you go.

In general, whenever a strong emotion arrives, try and deconstruct it down to sensations. That is to say, see that certain sensations tend to be labelled in certain ways, e.g. the thought label “fear” may be habitually applied to a knot-like sensation in the stomach area. “Anxiety” may be the thought label for trembling hands and nausea. "Anger" for "pounding in chest, more tears, burning sensation in eyes" etc.

Once you’re down to the bare sensation – having taken the thought label off it, the story can hardly go unnoticed. A knot in the stomach is a knot in the stomach, and nothing more – not fear, and not a story about something that brings fear. And so you smile. Till next time. ;)

Love
Rali

Hi,

I am going to try to explain what is happening. This is all thoughts and story. But cannot bring myself to focus on the questions right now.

Underneath the anger there is deep deep grief. Bottomless tears. This is attached to the memory thoughts that I lost my daughter shortly after birth last year. The thought that she did not does not exist because there is no DE is crippling.

I don’t know that I can go any further than this. It is so incredibly painful. There has been so much healing and distance in the last year, but this feeling today is as if it just happened all over again. I understand it is thoughts but this is where ‘I’ am clinging.

Weeping all morning since reading your response. Will try to break it down to raw sensation today. Not sure I can focus on so many questions.

Becca

Ok. Am ‘back’

So focus to me wouldn't be a label it would be DE being different over time I guess. But time is a thought that doesn't exist in DE. So no idea how to answer this.

How is it known that DE is different without the labels?
Is it different? It always IS. Only thought comes to say this wasn’t like that 5 min ago or a second ago.

It isn’t different without labels.
Yes.

Is there a change without anything being isolated and followed as “it” progresses?

No.

It's like looking at a lava lamp. The wax may seem to change shape, and the shapes it seems to take may seem to be present one moment, and absent the next. But all that is known is the wax. Nothing actually changed and nothing was ever born or lost, although it may have seemed to. Time and change are one of the most challenging concepts to see through clearly. We can look at time a bit further later if you want.

This is a very helpful image. And also I think reading “nothing was ever born” is what began the emotional plus thought storm of my last post. yes would like to look at time, there are so many thoughts coming up related to ‘past’ and this is where there is resistance/clinging…

They aren't different, memories are thoughts. Maybe more sneaky or compelling (?) because originally there was direct experience but then it just becomes a thought

How is it known that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened? Is it because thought says so? Is there an archive that you can go and check old experiences?

This is very confronting for the ‘I’ thought that wants to hold on to the memory thought of ‘my’ daughter. Yes. It is because thought says so. Yes thought is ‘the archive’ the archive is only thought. So many strong emotions arising with this but also noticing the content of thoughts that serve to intensify the feeling.

Back to "focus"… Focus on focusing, attention itself. Do you move it, or it moves by itself?

It just is. Without movement. At least in DE there is no movement.
????

Hold focus on breath - see how it moves to thoughts, sensations, feelings, sounds. Is this something you control?

no

What moves attention?

it doesn’t move. getting very confused by the call and response of doing exercises and ‘noticing’ but direct experience just is

What exactly is it made of?

There is no substance except in thought/fantasy so nothing.

Is it like a torch that lights up things sitting in the dark, choosing which one to light up? Or “things” are just appearing like that?

Experience is not choosing or appearing. It just is.

Look deeper! If there is no separation between thinking, seeing, hearing… (without the DE labels) how then can you “focus” on them? Or “focusing” is the mental separation into “things”, aka labelling/thinking?

Yes. Seeing that focusing was another hideout for the slippery ‘I’ in control.

Mind is a thought.. a thought that puts together all the thoughts.

Can a thought do anything but description/labelling?

Hmmm. There are thoughts that are images. But they don't do’ anything.

Can a thought think and organise other thoughts? Or this is just an anthropomorphism, like in language when you say the “grass is growing” (Is the grass growing itself?)?

No a thought doesn’t think and organize other thoughts. What I meant by the above is more that Mind is a thought and the content of that thought is thoughts. Puts together was not a clear way to explain that.

Are there separate thoughts with visual outlines showing where one thoughts end and the other starts (not looking at content)?

No

Are there separate thoughts or just thinking?

Hmmm Just thinking. separate thoughts are again only across ‘time’ not DE. Keep getting stuck there.

1) Look at the label/thought ‘anger’ itself. See the label/word ‘anger’ as a typewritten word Does the label ‘anger’ know anything about anger, or is the word just a bunch of letters?

Doing this exercise with sadness. Just letters.

Is the label ‘anger’ itself angry?

No.

Can you find anyone/anything in the word itself that is angry?

No.

Inquire into the sensation and ask if the sensation itself knows anything about ‘anger’.Does the sensation itself suggest in any way that it is ‘anger’ or that it is angry?

no, is just sensation not sadness

Can you find anyone or anything within or behind the sensation that is angry?

no

If other random mental images appear during the noticing of the sensation, check to see if those images are the self who is angry, or are they images that are simply arising and subsiding?

no images when only focusing on sensation

Did you find anyone or anything that is angry?

no

So, is there actual experience of ‘anger’ or what is actually appearing (DE) is label + sensation + colour + thoughts ABOUT anger?

Yes it is sensation of sadness plus a label and lots of thoughts.

Label ‘anger’ is known and thoughts about ‘anger’ are known, however, is ‘anger’ actually known?

no just sensations

Let me know how you go.

Just here. label for ‘tired’
there is a sensation of emptiness/hollowness in the body that is challenging to label.

Becca

Hi Becca

I’m so sorry to hear about your daughter! My deepest sympathies for your loss! My heart goes out to you as a mother. Thank you for trusting me and sharing this with me!
Looking could very hard when there is trauma. It takes a lot of courage and determination.
You did very well! It could be challenging to sit with difficult sensations, but the more you do it, the easier it becomes. Freedom and peace come from accepting and welcoming all experience – the good, the bad and the ugly.

This is very confronting for the ‘I’ thought that wants to hold on to the memory thought of ‘my’ daughter. Yes. It is because thought says so. Yes thought is ‘the archive’ the archive is only thought. So many strong emotions arising with this but also noticing the content of thoughts that serve to intensify the feeling.

Good! The more you notice the story, the easier it becomes to let it go. The raw sensations, without the story are not that problematic. Stories do not disappear (fortunately or unfortunately), so no need of clinging - you can’t keep them or get rid of them anyway, thoughts are not in your control. It is just that the stories are seen for what they are.
If you hurt your leg, naturally it will hurt and there will be a response, a reaction, even anger. It hurts, because it’s wounded. There is also a reaction when emotional wounds are touched or pressed on. That is, until they heal and no longer trigger any reaction. I want to clarify with all my love and compassion, that this process is about seeing what is really going on in your experience. It does not fix anything, nor change how things are. Only lets you see for yourself, by yourself, how it all works. If you are looking to fix something or get rid of strong emotions, this process will not help with that. If you want the truth, no matter what, and are ready to question your most precious and deeply held beliefs, then we can continue. We can also look at “others” in a bit more detail , whenever you are ready to do that, but no pressure!
However, is there a mother? Was there ever? What wants to keep the memories and clings to them? What suffers and experiences these strong emotions and the story? Was there a sad “I” when you looked into “sadness”? Was there an experiencer of sadness (sensations and thoughts)? To whom does it happen? Who can let the story go?
I know it could be very hard to answer these questions so take as much time as you need and answer when you are ready.
Please let me know if you want to postpone looking or change topic temporarily.

Love
Rali

Hello Rali,

I’m so sorry to hear about your daughter! My deepest sympathies for your loss! My heart goes out to you as a mother. Thank you for trusting me and sharing this with me!

Thank you truly for bearing with this part of the process.

Looking could very hard when there is trauma. It takes a lot of courage and determination.
You did very well! It could be challenging to sit with difficult sensations, but the more you do it, the easier it becomes. Freedom and peace come from accepting and welcoming all experience – the good, the bad and the ugly.

This event is a much longer story. What is interesting is that the actual time my daughter lived there was freedom and peace, and perspective that everything was perfect even though I knew she would not survive. It just was. The experience labeled ‘grief’ and associated thoughts came afterward, it was not the direct experience at the time. This is what propelled the intense searching of this year.

Stories do not disappear (fortunately or unfortunately), so no need of clinging - you can’t keep them or get rid of them anyway, thoughts are not in your control. It is just that the stories are seen for what they are.

This is helpful.

If you are looking to fix something or get rid of strong emotions, this process will not help with that. If you want the truth, no matter what, and are ready to question your most precious and deeply held beliefs, then we can continue.

There is nothing to be fixed. To be honest the suddenness and intensity of the emotions (and associated thoughts) was shocking. It had been a year since anything close to this level of intensity. But am committed to continuing.

We can also look at “others” in a bit more detail , whenever you are ready to do that, but no pressure!

Yes.

However, is there a mother?

No. Able to DE this today with both my own mother and my living daughter. There is nothing in the DE that carries that label.

Was there ever?

No. If not now then never.

What wants to keep the memories and clings to them?

Looking, there is no-one. It is a thought, but the thought doesn’t cling, ‘clinging’ is just another thought.

What suffers and experiences these strong emotions and the story?

There is DE sensations that are given the label ‘emotion’.
Suffering is thought. Story is thought.

Was there a sad “I” when you looked into “sadness”?

No

Was there an experiencer of sadness (sensations and thoughts)?

No just the direct experience of sensation with the label sadness.

To whom does it happen?

No-one.

Who can let the story go?

There is nothing to let go. If I understand what you wrote earlier the stories will continue anyway.

Please let me know if you want to postpone looking or change topic temporarily.

Thank you, we can continue.

Love, Becca

Hi Becca

This event is a much longer story. What is interesting is that the actual time my daughter lived there was freedom and peace, and perspective that everything was perfect even though I knew she would not survive. It just was. The experience labeled ‘grief’ and associated thoughts came afterward, it was not the direct experience at the time. This is what propelled the intense searching of this year.

Suffering comes, when it comes and comes in different shapes and forms. It’s empty, because of all the conditioned stories that have always been there. Sooner or later it gets to point when it becomes too much and seeking starts. Once the emptiness of these stories is seen though, they become lighter. The end of suffering is not when you see there is no self and automatically no one to suffer – that is bypassing. End of suffering happens when there are no more triggers left. And that is all conditioning. The whole structure, that was built in years, does not disappear instantly. It has to be seen through.

Emptiness in the Buddhist sense simply means that something is empty of self-nature. And no-thingness means that things are dependent. Just like an apple is a thing that doesn't exist. It is empty of apple-essence. Ideas are not objects or subjects themselves. Groups of concepts taken for truth of how things are become beliefs upon which new ideas land and stick like puzzle pieces, creating an even bigger, more magnificent castle of concepts. What seems to be “your world,” the totality of your experience of all that is happening, is a creation of language, and words are the building blocks that create the story about it.
Here is a short video, explaining this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYqaWmc ... 4&index=41

We can also look at “others” in a bit more detail , whenever you are ready to do that, but no pressure!

Yes.

We can do this, but let’s first finish with part 2 as this will also help…

with eyes closed it doesn’t seem like either, it isn’t my body and ‘a body’ is a label for an object which does not seem relevant, just a direct experience of spaciousness plus movement

What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

spaciousness and presence/raw experience

Is there an object there or just seeing (colours)? Again, is there a separate seeing of and object of seeing, OR just seeing with labels? How is spaciousness or presence experienced in DE? What do the words point to? Sensations (feeling)? Thought? Does experience happen in something/place/space (spacious)? Is there a container for experience, OR even the feeling of spaciousness is just feeling (subtle sensations but still)?

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to?

a visual experience of color/form/object which is lost with eyes closed. with eyes closed there is nothing that this label refers to

The actual experience of the body is thought. Thought points to sensation, colours (with eyes open), smells, tastes (when licking :) ), and labels it a ‘body’, but an actual body cannot be found as DE, right?

Here is an even deeper investigation of the body. Please follow each step, don't leave out any. Take your time. Don't move to the next step until the previous one is clearly seen. Repeat the exercise several times.

Stand in front of a bigger mirror.
1. First, close the eyes and feel the sensations labelled ‘body’.

2. Then open the eyes and look into the mirror while still paying attention to the sensations. Is there any connection between the felt sensations and the image in the mirror? Or just thoughts (and/or mental images) suggest that there is?

3. While still paying attention to the sensations move one hand and observe the movement from the mirror. Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and image of movement in the mirror?

4. Now do the same movement with the hand, but this time look at the hand directly, not from the mirror. Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and the image ‘of movement’? Or only thoughts suggest it?

5. Now, pay attention only to the image in the mirror. Does the image by itself suggest in any way that is ‘you’ or ‘your body’? Does the image itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘body’ at all? Or are there only colours and shapes?

6. Where the mirror ends, some parts of the body (probably legs) cannot be seen. Just by the image in the mirror, is there any ‘knowledge’ that there must be legs, or only thoughts and mental images suggest so?

7. Now turn away from the mirror and look forward (don’t look directly to any body parts). Is there a ‘body’ anywhere when all thoughts and images are ignored, or are there only sensations?

8. Start to walk slowly.
Is there a ‘body walking/moving’, or are there only sensations?
Is there actual experience of ‘walking’ at all?
Or just THOUGHTS ABOUT ‘walking’?
Can such a thing as ‘body’ be found OR just THOUGHTS ABOUT a ‘body’?
Can such a thing as ‘walking’ be found?

9. Are the sensations localized in space, like ‘going through the room’; OR is there only an image that is labelled ‘room’ and appearing sensations without any location?

Love
Rali

Please don't forget your example of daily activity broken down to DE labels (cup of coffee example). It should be a report and not a mental exercise :)

Seeing hair, simply= colour (seeing)
Smelling grass, simply = smell (smelling)
Feeling warmth/softness, simply = sensation (feeling)
Tasting bitterness, simply = taste (tasting)
Hearing singing (label for noise), simply = sound (hearing)
Thought about brushing hair, simply = thought (thinking)

with eyes closed it doesn’t seem like either, it isn’t my body and ‘a body’ is a label for an object which does not seem relevant, just a direct experience of spaciousness plus movement

What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

spaciousness and presence/raw experience

Is there an object there or just seeing (colours)?

just seeing: colors

Again, is there a separate seeing of and object of seeing, OR just seeing with labels?

Seeing plus labels

How is spaciousness or presence experienced in DE? What do the words point to? Sensations (feeling)? Thought? Does experience happen in something/place/space (spacious)? Is there a container for experience, OR even the feeling of spaciousness is just feeling (subtle sensations but still)?

Yes, excellent pointing/questioning of this. Yes, all these words point to sensation, the feeling of presence or spaciousness equates to multiple small pressure/pulse/tingling sensations plus the sound of a persistent ringing tone

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to?

a visual experience of color/form/object which is lost with eyes closed. with eyes closed there is nothing that this label refers to

The actual experience of the body is thought. Thought points to sensation, colours (with eyes open), smells, tastes (when licking :) ), and labels it a ‘body’, but an actual body cannot be found as DE, right?

Right

2. Then open the eyes and look into the mirror while still paying attention to the sensations. Is there any connection between the felt sensations and the image in the mirror? Or just thoughts (and/or mental images) suggest that there is?

no connection. actually thoughts are quiet, image seems ‘foreign’

3. While still paying attention to the sensations move one hand and observe the movement from the mirror. Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and image of movement in the mirror?

no

4. Now do the same movement with the hand, but this time look at the hand directly, not from the mirror. Is there any connection between the felt sensations (labelled ‘hand’) and the image ‘of movement’? Or only thoughts suggest it?

Got stuck here for quite some time because the sensations appearing and disappearing corresponded to the appearance of movement or stillness. But can see that it is a thought that bridges that gap. Direct experience is not connected.

5. Now, pay attention only to the image in the mirror. Does the image by itself suggest in any way that is ‘you’ or ‘your body’? Does the image itself suggest in any way that it is a ‘body’ at all? Or are there only colours and shapes?

No the image still appears ‘foreign’ ‘unknown’ not a body but a mass of color.

6. Where the mirror ends, some parts of the body (probably legs) cannot be seen. Just by the image in the mirror, is there any ‘knowledge’ that there must be legs, or only thoughts and mental images suggest so?

Just thoughts and mental images suggest it.

7. Now turn away from the mirror and look forward (don’t look directly to any body parts). Is there a ‘body’ anywhere when all thoughts and images are ignored, or are there only sensations?

Only sensations

8. Start to walk slowly.
Is there a ‘body walking/moving’, or are there only sensations?

only sensations

Is there actual experience of ‘walking’ at all?

there is a direct experience of light and color changing with a thought that labels this ‘movement’

Or just THOUGHTS ABOUT ‘walking’?

thoughts about it

Can such a thing as ‘body’ be found OR just THOUGHTS ABOUT a ‘body’?

Thoughts about a ‘body’. direct experience now is a mix of sensation plus label ‘anxiety’

Can such a thing as ‘walking’ be found?

no. more sensations with a thought label

9. Are the sensations localized in space, like ‘going through the room’; OR is there only an image that is labelled ‘room’ and appearing sensations without any location?

it is an image that only has a thought of depth. depth perception or space are thoughts . room is a label.


I kept going back to step 4 today. It is not organic yet. Takes time to look. Lots of thoughts. Then once step 4 is seen the rest come like dominoes.

Becca

Hi Becca
Very good!!!

Got stuck here for quite some time because the sensations appearing and disappearing corresponded to the appearance of movement or stillness. But can see that it is a thought that bridges that gap. Direct experience is not connected.

I kept going back to step 4 today. It is not organic yet. Takes time to look. Lots of thoughts. Then once step 4 is seen the rest come like dominoes.

Here is another exercise that might help:
1. Sit comfortably on a chair. Close your eyes. Lift your leg and pay attention to the sensation of “leg lifted”
2. Open your eyes and now pay attention to the sight of the leg only.
3. While looking at the leg, pay attention to the sensation of the leg.
Do sight and sensation appear simultaneously? Do they appear separately? Do they depend on each other? Is there a link between them?

Love
Rali

Hello :)

Seeing sky, simply= colour (seeing)
Smelling air, simply = smell (smelling)
Feeling wet/water, simply = sensation (feeling)
Tasting bitterness, simply = taste (tasting)
Hearing laughter, simply = sound (hearing)
Thought about thoughts, simply = thought (thinking)

Do sight and sensation appear simultaneously?

Yes.

Do they appear separately?

Also yes. Separate senses but all part of one experience. And sometimes one follows another.

Do they depend on each other?

No. Today, before this email there was the thought that all sensations/senses are separate and unrelated. Hearing laughter, feeling water, tasting sourness. Everything separate.

Is there a link between them?

No. Except ‘time’ meaning this moment of experience this is what is.

Not sure these answers are making any sense. The more the thoughts are just playing in the background the more different sensations are noticed and sometimes it is all at once. Like going from black and white to technicolor. The seeing just now was all new. The label was ‘leg’ but the DE was an unlabeled object radiating/glowing and it was separate from a pulsing sensation but simultaneous. Now for example there is movement as letters appear and sound of ringing (not even ringing in the ears since it is impossible to locate the sound with DE). Separate but simultaneous.


Becca

Hi Becca

Also yes. Separate senses but all part of one experience. And sometimes one follows another.

Are they separate without the “focus”/”labelling? Can you see a “physical” line/border that separates seeing from feeling? Or seeing “bird” from hearing “bird”? Do the senses happen in a separate “place”?

We don’t experience our senses individually. Rather, these are different aspects of experience. Mind tells us that our senses are separate streams of information. We see with our eyes, hear with our ears, feel with our skin, smell with our nose, taste with our tongue. In DE, though, it is seen as a one experience. Senses affect each other. Although speech is perceived through the ears, what we see can change what we hear. In this video, a man produces the same syllable over and over again. If you watch his mouth, you’ll hear the syllable “fah,” but if you look away, you’ll hear “bah.” Although your ears hear “bah,” your eyes see “fah”. This phenomenon is known as the McGurk effect. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k8fHR9jKVM )

Another example of sensory interaction is how both taste and smell are vital for savouring food (flavour). If smell is lost or impaired, for instance, the taste of food will also be impaired, even if taste receptors on the tongue are working fine.
Here is a fun video that demonstrates how a relationship between sight and touch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DphlhmtGRqI

Even though it might look as there are clearly defined senses, DE shows a different story. So even the senses are dependently originated which makes them also empty of inherent existence. Can you see that?

Not sure these answers are making any sense. The more the thoughts are just playing in the background the more different sensations are noticed and sometimes it is all at once. Like going from black and white to technicolor. The seeing just now was all new. The label was ‘leg’ but the DE was an unlabeled object radiating/glowing and it was separate from a pulsing sensation but simultaneous. Now for example there is movement as letters appear and sound of ringing (not even ringing in the ears since it is impossible to locate the sound with DE). Separate but simultaneous.

That is wonderful! Life is way more "colourful" than the thought description - like eating chocolate vs the description of eating chocolate :) (a chocolate fanatic here). Let me just make it clear that this is not about special states or experiences. This is about normal everyday stuff. Is DE a special mode of seeing/living, or is it where we see what is true and what is not?
Love
Rali

Hello :)


Seeing bright light, simply= colour (seeing)
Smelling shampoo, simply = smell (smelling)
Feeling wetness, warmth, simply = sensation (feeling)
Tasting seaweed, simply = taste (tasting)
Hearing water, simply = sound (hearing)
Thought about thankfulness, simply = thought (thinking)

Also yes. Separate senses but all part of one experience. And sometimes one follows another.

Are they separate without the “focus”/”labelling?

No

Can you see a “physical” line/border that separates seeing from feeling?

No

Or seeing “bird” from hearing “bird”?

No.

Do the senses happen in a separate “place”?

No. Just thought creates ‘location’

Here is a fun video that demonstrates how a relationship between sight and touch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DphlhmtGRqI

Very effective, thanks!

Even though it might look as there are clearly defined senses, DE shows a different story. So even the senses are dependently originated which makes them also empty of inherent existence. Can you see that?

Can see that dependently originated makes them empty of meaning/truth. Not clear that this makes them empty of existence?

…Sat with this for a while... Can now see that individual senses are empty of separate existence. It is all one experience.

That is wonderful! Life is way more "colourful" than the thought description - like eating chocolate vs the description of eating chocolate :) (a chocolate fanatic here). Let me just make it clear that this is not about special states or experiences. This is about normal everyday stuff. Is DE a special mode of seeing/living, or is it where we see what is true and what is not?

DE is not a special mode. Struggling with the label ‘true’ after the last two videos haha. So would say DE is where we see what is and what is not. (Though what is not is not actually seen from DE but determined via thought from the absence of DE.)

Becca