The Gate

Ok, let's examine the tension to see whether it can hold on to other sensations.
Please don't automatically say it can't, but actually examine.

I looked at the tension and it held itself. It held desire. It held seeking. It held the thought of the future. I continued to feel the tension change and the question came up “what is the tension being held in?”

It held desire. It held seeking. It held the thought of the future.

Can tension and desire be as something separate, right at the same moment?

Can tension and desire be as something separate, right at the same moment?

No they are the same sensation. Desire and tension are just two different labels for the same sensation.

Ok, please keep observing that particular sensation, and report what comes up.

Ok, please keep observing that particular sensation, and report what comes up.

The only aspect that changes are the thoughts about it. Thoughts are trying to pin down what, when, where, why, and how. But the sensation never changes except for the thought that it is changing.

But the sensation never changes

Is this really the case?

Please keep observing the sensation and try to catch even the minute changes
that occur to it. What do you notice?

But the sensation never changes

Is this really the case?

Please keep observing the sensation and try to catch even the minute changes
that occur to it. What do you notice?

Hey Kento :)

After observing the sensation, I found it to be like thought in that I can’t pin down where it starts and where it stops. I have the sense that it is changing, but I can’t say what has changed. It is like music that is always in the same place, but is in motion as well. Or like ripples in water.

It is like music that is always in the same place, but is in motion as well. Or like ripples in water.

Very nicely put, Statum! :)
Is time (past-present-future) involved in it, or is it more like the succession of present time?

Please don't automatically that the latter is "correct," but actually observe.

Is time (past-present-future) involved in it, or is it more like the succession of present time?

Please don't automatically that the latter is "correct," but actually observe.

In order to be able to talk about it, I have to break any change up into time. If what it was, is, and will be are the same, then I don’t recall that it is moving.

Ok, to make sure, is time involved in that "movement"?

Ok, to make sure, is time involved in that "movement"?

Only when I try to put words to it and explain it. If I communicate about movement, I have to say something like “it was [past tense] there and now [present tense] it is here.” I don’t need time to see my hand moving, but explaining why I would call the hand a moving hand makes me rely on time to describe it.

Thanks, Statum. :) That still sounds like a logical conclusion, but we want to see it in a
deeper level. Please observe your hand moving, and describe what's happening without thought
involved in it.

Please observe your hand moving, and describe what's happening without thought
involved in it.

Without thought, I would just say the hand is moving.

That is still thought. What about without any thought involved?

That is still thought. What about without any thought involved?

The hand is moving.