The Gate

Hi Bill

Thanks Rali. I'll take notes on this and report back to you.

Looking forward to your observations!

Is there anyone here doing this inquiry? Or just thoughts describing DE instead of referring to other thoughts?

I think I see what you mean. Attend to DE, right?

No. Don’t think you see.
PAUSE. Right now—look.
Is there anyone here doing inquiry? You are trying to solve this conceptually.
Not thoughts about it. Not a sense of effort. Not a commentary.
Can you find a doer—actually—not as a feeling, not as a thought-label, but as a tangible thing?
Where is the one attending to DE?
Or… is there just: Sensation. Sound. Colour. Thought saying “I am doing inquiry.”
But no thing behind the thought.
Isn’t the sense of “doing inquiry” just another arising, like a sound or itch?
Right now, drop the watcher. Drop the one “trying.”
What’s left?
No one.
Just this.
Now—look again.
Is that uncomfortable?
Or is it peace that the mind cannot claim?

Every time it felt hidden, there was a thought claiming ownership: "I should get it." "I don’t get it." "Why can’t I see it?" But that "I"—did it ever exist?

That was quite important to realize. A hurdle that took time to get over.

And now that the hurdle’s seen for what it was—a thought pretending to be an “I”…
Look again, freshly. Right now:
Where is the one who “got over” it?
Can you find that entity, the one who realized?
Or is that just another after-the-fact narrative?
What’s actually here before that story arises?
Strip the commentary. No memory, no identity, no thinker.
What’s left?
Not as a concept.
See it. Let it burn through the story.
Report from this—not from memory.
Love
Rali

No. Don’t think you see.
PAUSE. Right now—look.

Thanks Rali.

Is there anyone here doing inquiry?

No.

You are trying to solve this conceptually.
Not thoughts about it. Not a sense of effort. Not a commentary.
Can you find a doer—actually—not as a feeling, not as a thought-label, but as a tangible thing?

No.

Where is the one attending to DE?

There is no one.

Or… is there just: Sensation. Sound. Colour. Thought saying “I am doing inquiry.”
But no thing behind the thought.

Yes.

Isn’t the sense of “doing inquiry” just another arising, like a sound or itch?
Right now, drop the watcher. Drop the one “trying.”
What’s left?
No one.
Just this.

Yes.

Now—look again.
Is that uncomfortable?
Or is it peace that the mind cannot claim?

Neither peace nor discomfort.

And now that the hurdle’s seen for what it was—a thought pretending to be an “I”…
Look again, freshly. Right now:
Where is the one who “got over” it?

There is no one.

Can you find that entity, the one who realized?

No.

Or is that just another after-the-fact narrative?

Yes!

What’s actually here before that story arises?

Hmm.

Strip the commentary. No memory, no identity, no thinker.
What’s left?

Nothing. Just this.

Not as a concept.
See it. Let it burn through the story.
Report from this—not from memory.

Thanks Rali.

Looking forward to your observations!

So am I. I hope to apply it repeatedly.

Good. Stay with this. Report what’s undeniable—not what you think, but what you see.

Thanks Rali.

Can you find anywhere outside of now?

There is only now.

Don’t answer—check. Not as an idea. Not in memory. Not in anticipation. Just now.
The question implies comparison, but where’s the second point? When is “not now”? Can you directly experience "30s ago" or "tomorrow"?

30s or 30mya. Not much difference. Neither exist. Nor does the future.

Can you step out of this? Even for a second?

No.

Or is “time” just a movement within this, a story told by thought, in thought, as thought?

Nobody knows what it is.

Strip it all down. Is there ever more than just this?

No.

Is there any edge to now?

None. That's remarkable.

Or is it endless—not in duration, but in immediacy?

Why not in duration.

Stay here. Let everything fall away.
What’s left?

Hmm.

Hi Bill

Or is “time” just a movement within this, a story told by thought, in thought, as thought?

Nobody knows what it is.

Or is it endless—not in duration, but in immediacy?

Why not in duration.

Because duration/time is a story. A thought. A line drawn in imagination.
Look now. Not in imagination.
Does duration exist here, or is it assumed?
Check closely:
Duration needs two points.
But can you find even one? Not in the story but in actual experience! Look right now!
Right here, is there anything stretching?
What makes “duration” seem real—other than a thought/memory?

There is a general assumption that there is linear time that started (if started at all) somewhere very far in the past and advances to the distant future. The present moment (now) is considered to be a very small fragment of time, or an event that is moving forward on a linear line, coming from the past and advancing to the future.

But is there an experience of the ’now’ moving along the line of time?
Any experience of one ‘moment’ giving way to the next?
Is there any gap, edge, beginning, or end in what’s actually happening now?
Is there any direct experience of one event following another?
How fast is the ‘present moment’ actually moving?
Just look at 'this moment', can you find an actual point where it began (without the story)?
How long does the ‘now’ last?
Where does the ‘now’ start, and where does it end?
When does the ‘now’ exactly become the 'past'?
What is the ‘past’ in actual experience?
So is there actual experience of ‘time’/’duration’ or thoughts about ‘time’/'duration'?

Even physics agrees that time is relative to your frame of reference. How can you even “track” anything if you can’t separate/isolate it?
You can’t. And you never could. Time only makes sense when things are carved out, outlined, and given names. “This came before that.” “It took three seconds.” But where are those things without the label?
Without names… where does one sensation end and another begin? Thought is a pattern detector ;)

Can time even exist without memory (i.e. stories about a past/a beginning of a duration)? So let’s explore memories...
Almost everybody believes that a memory thought is referring to something that has happened. That a memory thought is a different thought than a non-memory thought. Please don’t go to thought explanations, but just let a memory be there, and look at it. Look at what is actually going on and not what thoughts say.

What is memory exactly?
What is the memory ‘made of’?
WHEN does the memory appear?
What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘memory’ thought?
How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened?

Then, look at a thought about the future.
What is the future thought ‘made of’?
WHEN does the future thought appear?
What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘future’ thought?
How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘future’ thought refers to something that will happen?

Then let’s compare a thought about past and a thought about the future.

What is the EXACT difference between the thoughts about past and future?
If there is difference and how is that difference is known exactly?
Love
Rali

Looking forward to your observations!

It's a beautiful exercise, Rali. Thanks so much.

Feel that directly now—not the story about it.
Not “something’s missing” as a thought, but the raw discomfort itself.
Where is it? What shape? What colour? Is there a boundary? A center?

None of that.

Now strip the label.
What’s actually here—before you say what it is?

Some discomfort.

Stay with that. Does anything in the raw sensation suggest that “something is missing”? How exactly? Does it demand resolution, or is that just another thought trying to fix what never broke?

Good question. It seems something is missing, but if I examine the thought, it doesn't demand resolution.

Is it really unpleasant? Is the actual sensation itself unpleasant, or is unpleasantness added by thought?

Mostly the thought.

Does it even need to go? What if that’s the point?
Not to escape it. Not to fix it. Not to wait it out.
But to drop every attempt to do any of that… and stay.

Thank you, Rali. Yes, why not.

Right there—in the fire of discomfort—what can’t be tolerated?
Without the label “uncomfortable,” what is it?

It's quite tolerable.

Is it pain? Pressure? Energy?

No.

Can you even find a “you” that it’s happening to?

No. It's here but attached to nobody.

What happens when you don’t resist?
Look now.

After a short time, it dissipates.

Here is an exercise that you can apply to any “unpleasant” sensation.

Thanks so much, Rali.

If you don’t think about it, do you know that this sensation is something called, for example, ‘confusion’?

No.

Is there any inherent confusion in the sensation itself?

Hmm. Mebbe.

Go to the sensation at the soles of the feet. Would you label that sensation ‘confusion’? Or is it just a neutral, undefined tingling sensation?

Good point. Of course that isn't confusion or anything similar.

Now compare the sensation of the soles of the feet – which is just neutral sensation – and the sensation in your chest (labelled ‘tension’/’confusion’))…what is the difference between them?

Nothing is located at the chest position. The difference is not as large as one might expect.

A little bit more intense, but apart from that – any difference?

Qualitatively, yes.

When an “unpleasant" sensation, there are usually thoughts how things should be different and they should not be here. But these are just thoughts. Next time instead of concentrating on exploring the desire for the sensation to go away, try staying with it (the raw sensation), welcoming it -provided that is not life threatening of course. See what happens with it. Eventually belief in the truthfulness of any story drops away. The story is way more enjoyable without a "me" and the fear that something can happen to this “me.” Once it’s clearly seen that there is no actual me, there is no place for the story to stick (to form an identity). Whatever happens feels okay. Even pain :)
Relatively speaking (icons on the desktop), if an action could be taken, it’s taken (like taking a painkiller or some other medicine) and if not, just watch, smile, take notes, and release :).

You're awesome, Rali. Thanks so much. And thanks for the tremendous amount of help you've given me so far. You're like an angel.

But is there an experience of the ’now’ moving along the line of time?

I see nothing moving.

Any experience of one ‘moment’ giving way to the next?

No.

Is there any gap, edge, beginning, or end in what’s actually happening now?

No.

Is there any direct experience of one event following another?

Yes, of course.

How fast is the ‘present moment’ actually moving?

"fast"? ... as in seconds per second?

Just look at 'this moment', can you find an actual point where it began (without the story)?

Not really.

How long does the ‘now’ last?

It certainly does have a finite duration. But I can't tell exactly how much.

Where does the ‘now’ start, and where does it end?

It neither starts nor ends.

When does the ‘now’ exactly become the 'past'?

Oh wow. Now, I s'pose.

What is the ‘past’ in actual experience?

It's thought. And perhaps a sense of elapsed time?

So is there actual experience of ‘time’/’duration’ or thoughts about ‘time’/'duration'?

It's hard to say.

What is memory exactly?

Dunno.

What is the memory ‘made of’?

My guess is that it's the same stuff as thought, but there must also be a sort of record.

WHEN does the memory appear?

Now.

What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘memory’ thought?

Good question. Is there any difference.

How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘memory’ thought refers to something that has happened?

That's not known at all. Memories are unreliable.

What is the future thought ‘made of’?

Just thought. How could it be anything else.

WHEN does the future thought appear?

Now.

What is the exact difference between a ‘general’ thought and a ‘future’ thought?

Seems like no difference.

How is it known EXACTLY that a ‘future’ thought refers to something that will happen?

Of course you can't know that.

What is the EXACT difference between the thoughts about past and future?

I have no clue.

So let’s explore memories...
Almost everybody believes that a memory thought is referring to something that has happened. That a memory thought is a different thought than a non-memory thought. Please don’t go to thought explanations, but just let a memory be there, and look at it. Look at what is actually going on and not what thoughts say.

Looks like it's just regular thought. Is it?

Hi Bill

It's a beautiful exercise, Rali. Thanks so much.

I’m glad you enjoyed!

Stay with that. Does anything in the raw sensation suggest that “something is missing”? How exactly? Does it demand resolution, or is that just another thought trying to fix what never broke?

Good question. It seems something is missing, but if I examine the thought, it doesn't demand resolution.

What happens if you examine the raw sensation instead (not the thought)?-
Does the sensation demand a resolution?
The sensation doesn’t ask for anything. It doesn’t say, “Fix me”, right? Only the thought about the sensation claims there’s a problem. This is the entire illusion of seeking. Thought assigns lack to a neutral sensation—then offers itself as the solution.
Look again.
Is there actually anything broken?
Does the raw experience need to be resolved?
Or does it just… appear?
This is where the illusion dissolves. Not by answers and not by fixing. But by seeing there’s nothing wrong and no one it’s wrong for.
So tell me:
Right now, without resolving anything…What’s actually missing in DE? Be precise. Can you name it? Point to it? Or is it just another thought trying to land?

Is there any inherent confusion in the sensation itself?

Hmm. Mebbe.

Stay right there. Feel it directly. Don’t talk about it. Don’t analyse it. Just drop into it.
This sensation—right now—is it confused?
Where exactly is the confusion located? In the tingling? The tightening? The warmth?
Or is it just this, unfiltered, unowned, unexplained?
Look without reaching for meaning.
Does the raw sensation say: “I’m confused” in any way?
Or is that thought?
What if nothing needs decoding?
What if this—exactly this—is the end of the line?

In Buddhism the term “suchness” or “thusness” (whatever is happening) is used, referring to the nature of reality free from conceptual elaborations and the subject–object distinction. I like the word “THIS” as it is more like a pointing word – pointing to whatever is directly experienced like an arrow with no extra meaning – rather than labelling the experience. THIS! --->

Now compare the sensation of the soles of the feet – which is just neutral sensation – and the sensation in your chest (labelled ‘tension’/’confusion’))…what is the difference between them?

Nothing is located at the chest position. The difference is not as large as one might expect.

A little bit more intense, but apart from that – any difference?

Qualitatively, yes.

Good. Now cut even deeper. That “qualitative” difference—look again. Strip away the label and the storyline. Drop completely into sensation without commentary.
What exactly is the difference, when no narrative is added? Isn’t it just sensation—arising, shifting, fading?
Where is the “confusion”?
Where is the “me” who feels it?
If you don’t name it… does it need resolution at all?
Sit there. No fixing. No describing. No escape. Just this.

Still any difference?

Is there any direct experience of one event following another?

Yes, of course.

How long does the ‘now’ last?

It certainly does have a finite duration. But I can't tell exactly how much.

What is the ‘past’ in actual experience?

It's thought. And perhaps a sense of elapsed time?

Look again. Very closely. Slowly. Not what thought says is happening.
What is directly experienced?
Is “elapsed time” ever anything more than another thought (labelled memory)?
Can you actually find one event, then another without the thought description (saying how this is different aka "event")?
Without the story and labels “cutting out” things there are no events, but just this, pulsating, seemingly taking different values but never actually changing. 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. All that is known is this - nothing can be added to it, nor taken away. Time and change are one of the most challenging concepts to see through clearly.
Can you find a “before” and “after” in pure sensation? Or is there just this…One undivided movement, labelled after the fact?
Isn’t “sequence” just a thought about what’s happening?
Where’s the gap between events—without that thought? What is the gap made of?
Don’t explain. LOOK.
Right now: where is the past?
Where is “of course”?
Is “now” something you see ending? Or is the idea that it “has a duration” just another thought?
Where does that duration begin—can you find the actual edge?
Where does it end—can you find the cutoff?
...Or is “now” simply what’s here, without beginning, without end?
Can you find a time that is not now?
Anything outside of this, ever?
Stop describing. Look.
How long is this?

What is the memory ‘made of’?

My guess is that it's the same stuff as thought, but there must also be a sort of record.

Right now—this moment—can you find anything called “the past” that isn’t a memory/thought?
You said yourself that with respect to thoughts about the past (memories) and thoughts about the future (predictions): “Looks like it's just regular thought.”

Where is the “past” that is recorded outside of this/right here/right now?
And tell me this:
Did that memory happen, or did it just appear—now—like everything else? Where is the concrete proof of a "past event" in DE right now? Where is this “record” right now? Can you find anything like a stored archive? Or is “record” just another thought that arose, trying to explain the appearance of another thought?
Forget why a memory appears and it’s stored. What is there without the label “memory” and the story of “elapsed time”?
What is the past? And to whom it belongs?
What is that, which is supposed to be storing or retrieving the memories, following the time line? Is there a visible time line without thoughts? Where is the control center that monitors?
Can you find any of it—now?

What is the EXACT difference between the thoughts about past and future?

I have no clue.

Good. Honesty is key. Look now then, freshly:
A thought of the “past” appears (what you did yesterday)—what is it made of?
Just a mental image? A story? A sensation?
Then look at a “future” thought (what you will do tomorrow)—same ingredients?
Where, in either, is time? WHEN are both thoughts happening?
Is there any substance that makes one “before” and one “ahead”?
Or is the only difference a label—an interpretation applied after the thought arises, describing the “nature” of thought?
Strip the label. Strip the story. Just the raw appearance.
So…
Where is the past?
Where is the future?
What’s actually here before meaning?
Love
Rali

No.

Where is the “past” that is recorded outside of this/right here/right now?

Memory thoughts occur only now.

Did that memory happen, or did it just appear—now—like everything else?

Yeah, that's how it works, but sometimes there are events acting as prods to recover a memory.

Where is the concrete proof of a "past event" in DE right now?

There's none at all.

Where is this “record” right now? Can you find anything like a stored archive?

No. I'm assuming there must be one.

Or is “record” just another thought that arose,

Yes.

trying to explain the appearance of another thought?

No, it wasn't an attempt to explain the appearance of another thought.

What is there without the label “memory” and the story of “elapsed time”?

Just thought.

What is the past?

Nobody knows.

And to whom it belongs?

To whom? How can it be something that's owned.

Is there a visible time line without thoughts?

No. And I'm sure we're often mistaken about the temporal order of past events.

Where is the control center that monitors?

Can you find any of it—now?

?

Control? The time line, you mean? Good question. How it's constructed, I have no clue.

A thought of the “past” appears (what you did yesterday)—what is it made of?

Same stuff as other thought.

Just a mental image? A story? A sensation?

Yeah.

Then look at a “future” thought (what you will do tomorrow)—same ingredients?

Yes.

Where, in either, is time? WHEN are both thoughts happening?

They can only happen now.

Is there any substance that makes one “before” and one “ahead”?

Just thought.

Or is the only difference a label—an interpretation applied after the thought arises, describing the “nature” of thought?

Yeah, that sounds right. Except that it might be applied before the thought arises.

Where is the past?
Where is the future?

Both are nonexistent. But in the past, information was created, and in the future, information was not yet created.

What’s actually here before meaning?

?