The Gate

Hi Irene
The looking around thought, time, choice, control, and causation is clear.

Now let’s bring this into ordinary life.
Where does “Irene” still show up most strongly?
Not as the word or label “Irene,” but as a felt sense of:
“This is happening to me.”
“I must control this.”
“I should have done differently.”
“They shouldn’t treat me like this.”
“I need to protect or defend myself.”
“I need them to understand or approve of me.”
Think of one recent, specific situation where there was a strong emotional reaction.
What happened?
What thoughts appeared?
What sensations were present?
What exactly seemed threatened, blamed, defended, ashamed, responsible, or in control?
In that moment, could an actual Irene be found?
Or were there sensations, thoughts, reactions, and actions, followed by the story that they belonged to and were happening to “me”?
Please choose the situation where the sense of “me” was strongest—not the easiest example.
Look at it while the reaction is still alive, rather than only analysing it afterward.
Love
Rali

Hi Rali,

Where does “Irene” still show up most strongly?

In the past few months, it was often very strong at work when I got negative feedback. “Apparently I’m not doing well enough” “I have so much work to do, and I need to find a way to manage it all” “I’m really doing my best, but it’s not visible. I need to put more effort in showing what I accomplish” “It’s not constructive to talk to me so angrily”

Sometimes also at home when I don’t feel good: “I’m so tired, but all this still needs to happen” “I wanted to have a nice evening, but I feel like shit”

Think of one recent, specific situation where there was a strong emotional reaction.
What happened?

Let’s pick the work one. My manager told me he didn’t believe I was doing enough work in an accusing tone.

What thoughts appeared?

See the thoughts above at the first question. Apart from those, also surprise “Why am I so affected by this?” “It’s better to let it go” “Work isn’t everything, if it doesn’t work out the world is not going to end”. Then problem-solving like “I need to…” “I shouldn’t…”

What sensations were present?

Emotions: shock/ disbelief at the moment of the conversation, sadness later (tearful eyes, lump in throat), anger (tension in muscles)

What exactly seemed threatened, blamed, defended, ashamed, responsible, or in control?

Back then it felt like I needed to protect “me”: the image they have of me/ the idea of who I am and what I accomplish.

There is also a sense of unresolved mismatch: “This doesn’t correspond to my experience! How can there be such a mismatch? This isn’t right!”

But in experience it can only have been a narration putting together the different thoughts and sensations.

What feels shock? There is just the sensation of shock
What feels sadness, unfairness, defensive? Can only be a label for the feelings and thoughts appearing.

In that moment, could an actual Irene be found?

No, just feelings and thoughts.

Or were there sensations, thoughts, reactions, and actions, followed by the story that they belonged to and were happening to “me”?

Yes

Look at it while the reaction is still alive, rather than only analysing it afterward.

This was all based on memory, but I will keep a watch out for “I”. The last few weeks there hasn’t been a very strong reaction like what I described, more of the tiredness-related thoughts.

Hi Irene,
This is a good place to shift emphasis.
When one of these reactions appears — tiredness, frustration, feeling criticised, feeling misunderstood — you don’t need to analyse the story in detail. We can look at the story and see that what it’s talking about doesn’t exist - icons on the desktop – but “no me, no problem” can become a bypass: the story is denied while the contraction that gives the story its force remains unchecked. Staying with the sensation is more productive because nothing has to be believed or disproved. The reaction is allowed to be fully there (pleasant or unpleasant), while the narrative loses its privileged status. Then you can look directly whether the sensation contains a victim (Irene and HER expeirence), manager (HIS experience), a mismatch, owners, or problem, someone in need of protection,...—or whether those arrive with the story.
So… Just notice that the story is there and let it remain in the background. Stay with the felt sensations that are present alongside it.
Where is it felt?
What is the raw sensation before calling it: anger/sadness/tiredness/unfairness/defensiveness/shock?
Stay close to the sensation.
Does it have a shape? A boundary? A centre?
Does it stay the same? Does it move or change?
And while staying with it, notice any thought trying to explain, solve, defend, or escape.
Let those thoughts remain in the background too. No need to get rid of them. Just keep returning to the felt sensation itself. Then look:
Is there anything in the sensation itself that says: “this is happening to me”?
Or is “me” part of the story that gets added around the sensation?
Use the next ordinary moment of tiredness, irritation, or contraction as it happens. No need for a dramatic trigger. Just stay with what is felt and see what remains when the narrative is not followed.

Love
Rali

Hi Rali,

Here are the answers I wrote while I had a “feeling defensive” moment. I will keep watching out for them.

Where is it felt?

Sensations in the face (mouth downward)

What is the raw sensation before calling it: anger/sadness/tiredness/unfairness/defensiveness/shock?

Not sure what to call it except mouth pointing down, trembling lightly

Does it have a shape? A boundary? A centre?

No, only thought gives it a “(“ shape in imagination. The sensation itself is just the tingling and muscle tension appearing, like floating without boundary or center.

Does it stay the same? Does it move or change?

After staying with it for a few minutes, it becomes less until just very slight.

Is there anything in the sensation itself that says: “this is happening to me”?

No

Or is “me” part of the story that gets added around the sensation?

Yes, only a thought

Hi Irene,
Yes! This is the kind of looking I mean. Notice especially this... There is sensation. Then thought adds: “defensive”, “this is happening to me”, “I don’t like this”, “I need to protect myself”. But the sensation itself contains none of that.

After staying with it for a few minutes, it becomes less until just very slight.

Just don’t make the sensation becoming weaker into a goal. If it fades, fine. If it stays, fine. If it gets stronger, fine. Just stay curious about what is actually there.
Next time this happens, stay with the sensation and look a little further:
Does the sensation belong to anyone?
Can an owner of it be found?
Does it contain any instruction to resist, defend, explain, or act?
Or do those come with thought?
And while the story continues in the background, notice:
Is the story actually changing the sensation?
Is the sensation changing the story?
Or are sensation and commentary simply happening together, with thought tying them into “my defensiveness”?
No need to solve anything, just stay close to what is felt and see what is actually there.

Love
Rali

Hi Rali,

I had a busy weekend and didn’t do the exercise yet. I don’t always recognise the situation as an opportunity to do it and sometimes if I do, I get distracted before taking a quiet moment to sit with it.

Hi Rali,

I had a busy weekend and didn’t do the exercise yet. I don’t always recognise the situation as an opportunity to do it and sometimes if I do, I get distracted before taking a quiet moment to sit with it.

Hi Irene
That's completely normal. And at the end you don't really do the recognising of the situation (you are not the understander nor the thinker) - it just happens, thoughts are self-organised. Sometimes "noticing" happens and sometimes "old patterns" play out. The next time distraction happens notice that distraction is another protective mechanism that works to preserve old ways - as if an invisible shield of certainty is being threatened, so sometimes it may seem difficult "to hold focus".
It's good that you are aware that this scenario is playing itself out. Distractions often come as sudden impulses to do something else. Something comes up with a sense of urgency—a pull to engage in some other activity that moves you away from investigation. It is okay, of course, to follow that impulse and get distracted. It is also okay to notice it and keep focusing. Don’t take the distractions seriously, just note when they show up and see what is behind them.
What is being protected?

Love
Rali

Hi Rali,

I couldn’t post yesterday due to some server issues or something like that. In any case, there is not much happening on my side, but I’ll give you a daily update I wrote yesterday.

I haven’t noticed any defensiveness/ unfairness today, but I do notice thoughts “preparing for a difficult situation”, like rehearsing a response for when I get criticism. There is no sensation/feeling that accompanies them, but the only reason why they appear is to defend “me”, or at least that’s how thought explains them coming up after they are noticed.
The “preparation for criticism” thoughts come together with a memory of previous criticism (where I do remember defensiveness and being upset).

Other than that, I observed a tension headache. Is it my headache? Does it belong to me? No, just sensation floating together with thought saying “I have a headache”.

There was no noticing and then distraction from looking today, but during work I am very busy so not many thoughts come up noting what is happening. Very rarely when I take a break by myself I will note “lots of thoughts now” and observe them for a minute, but that’s about it.

Don’t take the distractions seriously, just note when they show up and see what is behind them.
What is being protected?

Just to clarify, how do I go about finding what is being protected / what is behind something? Ask the question in thought and see what comes up?

Hi Irene

Wonderful looking!

I do notice thoughts “preparing for a difficult situation”, like rehearsing a response for when I get criticism. There is no sensation/feeling that accompanies them, but the only reason why they appear is to defend “me”, or at least that’s how thought explains them coming up after they are noticed.
The “preparation for criticism” thoughts come together with a memory of previous criticism (where I do remember defensiveness and being upset).

Don’t try to work out why the thought appeared. That would just be more thought explaining thought. When ‘preparing for criticism’ appears, notice what is actually there. Is there an imagined conversation? An image of yourself being criticised? Any contraction or urgency?
You’re not trying to discover the correct psychological explanation for these thoughts (e.g. 'defending my reputation’ or ‘being seen as competent’). You’re looking at how the sense of ‘me’ is being assembled right now.
We could ask ... if there is no Irene what is “her reputation” or “her competence”? Unfortunately, that question can lead to bypassing – “no me, no problem”. These thoughts are strategies that are aimed at the avoidance of the “unpleasant” sensations of “guilt”, “shame”, “fear”, or “anger” (or a combination of them), but sensations are here to be experienced and they are not going away. We are not trying to psychoanalyse the reasons behind these thoughts, we are trying to see the “mechanism” of how it all works - so stripping the whole explanation to just cathegorising it as one of the four (or a combination) and staying with the specific sensation, stripped further from its label (e.g shame), seeing its "innocence" or neutrality/meaninglessness.
It’s important to understand the difference between psychoanalysis and inquiry, and the risk of bypassing. Psychoanalysis or therapy may address the narrative surrounding the situation (the story), but inquiry demands turning away from the story entirely to confront and create space for the resulting uncomfortable sensation in the body, while bypassing is the trick thoughts plays to skip the uncomfortable confrontation altogether by relying on intellectual insights or deflection – no me, no problem. However, the pattern of avoidance is still here, until it’s seen properly. There is a possibility that the pattern continues even after no self is found. The conditioned response doesn’t have to vanish for its premise to be seen through ;)

In the light of that…

Just to clarify, how do I go about finding what is being protected / what is behind something? Ask the question in thought and see what comes up?

When you have two opposing views (i.e. old and new views of reality) you have to keep checking their validity. What we are used to "do" is "to check" if a new idea fits with the rest of our beliefs and disregard it if it doesn’t (confirmation bias). This method saves energy so it was used for a really long time. Now we’ve added a second method for dealing with opposing concepts – "to check" with our senses which one truly describes what is happening. The resistance (e.g. distraction) comes from that confirmation bias as you have not just one thought but a system of thoughts forming “your” view/belief system/your "bubble" of reality. Thoughts are self-organising and they stick to each other like matching puzzle pieces (stories about stories). Anything new that comes along and does not match the pattern will be attempted to get rid of as it costs the "system" “energy” to rebuild it from scratch.
So to reduce the resistance all thoughts need to be painstakingly examined, one by one as they appear, in order for thoughts to self-organise and form a new core of belief system. And I underlie self-organise as this is not in your control, it just happens. I’ve basically introduced a virus thought (LOOK!) that causes all thoughts to be reorganised around the experience :) We've looked at some basic beliefs (e.g. the doer, the thinker, ...), but there are plenty others that are indirectly or directly linked to these. So when there is resistance, it's a good pointer for old beliefs at play.

When I ask ‘What is being protected?’, I’m not asking you to work out the psychological reason behind the distraction. Look directly.
Is there actually an Irene here that needs protecting?
Can anything be found that is threatened by this new way of seeing? What is at stake?
Or is there simply an old protective pattern arising — rehearsal, distraction, defensiveness, preparation — together with thoughts saying ‘me’, ‘mine’, ‘I need to…’?
Does the pattern itself prove that there is someone being protected?
Or is the sense of ‘someone who needs protection’ part of the pattern?
Once it's seen that no entity needs protection, sitting with the "uncomfortable" raw sensations (in this case the urge to do something "more interesting or urgent" but doing inquiry instead :) ) is what changes the story...
Love
Rali

Hi Rali,

I understand what you say about the risk of bypassing, and it seems like a real risk indeed. Lots of thoughts are there to distract from looking, for example “What’s the point of all this?” “No me, so no need for searching” “There is nothing to protect, so why look further”.

I understand from what you say, that the important thing is to keep breaking down experience into seeing/hearing/thinking etc. Examine labels that come up in thought to see what they point to, like ‘distraction’ (what is distraction made of? What is distracted?) but not ask questions like “why is the distraction happening?”. It’s hard not to go into the second type of questions. For example “Distraction from what?” seems like the first type, but it’s easy to go into a story from there.

Staying with “the urge to do something” is a good one.

I want to say “I will do my best” but there is no one controlling what is noticed and what not, when staying with sensations happens or not. In any case, I will keep writing every day.

Hi Irene,
Yes, you’ve got the important distinction, with one small refinement. You don’t need to spend the rest of your life breaking everything down into seeing/hearing/feeling/thinking. Those labels were tools for learning to distinguish what is directly present from the story about it. You have already seen that the labels themselves are only pointers. What is useful now is when something has some charge to it (an urge to distract, defend, explain, rehearse, withdraw, fix, or escape) - the conditioned places where “me” still feels compelling. For example: “What’s the point of all this?” / “No me, so why search?” / “There’s nothing to protect.” Don’t argue with those thoughts and don’t accept them as answers either. Notice them, let them remain in the background, and look at what else is present.
Is there tension? Restlessness? An urge to move? To open another tab? To get up? To solve something? To stop looking?
Stay with that.
And when I ask: “What is being distracted?” / “What is being protected?”, I’m not asking “why is this happening?” or inviting a psychological explanation. I’m pointing much more literally:
Is there actually an Irene here being distracted?
Is there an entity that needs protection?
Or is there an a pattern of urge, sensation, thought, movement — and then the story of “me” woven through it?
“Distraction from what?” can indeed become another story very quickly, so if that happens, drop the question and return to the urge itself:
What does the urge actually feel like before thought explains it?

I want to say “I will do my best” but there is no one controlling what is noticed and what not, when staying with sensations happens or not. In any case, I will keep writing every day.

Yes, “I will do my best” and “I will keep writing” are perfectly fine language. We don’t need to mutilate ordinary speech. The only question is whether, when looked for, an actual controller corresponding to that “I” can be found.

Just to keep this grounded in daily life, don’t turn it into another big exercise. When something has a bit of charge — irritation, defensiveness, tiredness, urgency, rehearsing a conversation, wanting to distract yourself, wanting to prove something — just notice it when recognition happens. Then look:
What is actually felt?
What story is running?
Is there an Irene in the sensation itself?
Is there anything here that actually needs protecting?
Does the recognising happen by itself, or is there someone doing the recognising?

No need to resolve anything or make the reaction go away. For your daily update, one ordinary example is enough - pick one, look and report:
What happened?
What was felt?
What did thought say?
When you looked, was an actual Irene found anywhere in it?
Once or twice during the day, notice some completely ordinary action already happening — reaching for the phone, standing up, opening a door, taking a sip.
Was there an Irene initiating it?
Or did the action happen, with thought commenting on it before, during, or after?

At this point, it could also be a good DE exercise to get out for an actual walk in nature and observe interconnectedness. See how all is moving interdependently, including thinking and the senses. Hold these questions in mind:
Is there anything that is separate from everything else?
Is there a border that divides “me” and “my body” from everything else, or is it just a thought? Is that interdependent movement outside of you? Is there an “inside” and an “outside”?
Is there an owner of being?
Are there others? Is there an “I” in others?
Is there a “you”?
Love
Rali

Hi Rali,

Here is a daily report with an example. It’s especially difficult to stay with unease instead of distraction when I am with friends or family, where there is more distracting things and less quiet space to focus.

Luckily for me, I ended up being so hungry that there was no escaping unease for a while.

What happened?

Hungry and tired, I was incredibly annoyed at everything.

What was felt?

Tension in forehead, knot in stomach.

What did thought say?

Thought was non stop commenting on everything. “This person talking like that is annoying” “Do they just want to show off?” “Why do they talk in that tone of voice?” “It can’t be me colouring perception, this is objectively not nice” “I don’t want to be here” ”Everything sucks today”

When you looked, was an actual Irene found anywhere in it?

No, just the incessant thoughts. There were some thoughts about “me” being “unfortunate”, but they are just thoughts.


When observing what was happening, I couldn’t find anything “wrong” or “bad” with the feelings or thoughts that were coming up, but the incessant thoughts were labeled as “unpleasant”. The tension in the forehead and stomach sensation werent that “unpleasant” by themselves.

Hi Rali,

Here are my notes from yesterday.

This morning thoughts came up about fear. “What if I was too mean yesterday?“ came along with memories. No particular sensations that I noticed, but I didn’t stop to look very deeply. I talked about it before diving into “Is there an Irene that is afraid?”. And after the conversation the thoughts stopped.

Later in the day I observed the following:

What happened?

Partner wants time alone

What was felt?

Tinging, warmth in chest, tired eyes

What did thought say?

Did I do something wrong? Is it my fault? I dont think I did anything wrong. Do I feel guilt or sadness? Perhaps a bit of sadness, but hard to notice for sure

When you looked, was an actual Irene found anywhere in it?

No

Hi Irene

How did the walk go? You didn’t report anything on that…

Thought was non stop commenting on everything. “This person talking like that is annoying” “Do they just want to show off?” “Why do they talk in that tone of voice?” “It can’t be me colouring perception, this is objectively not nice” “I don’t want to be here” ”Everything sucks today”

When observing what was happening, I couldn’t find anything “wrong” or “bad” with the feelings or thoughts that were coming up, but the incessant thoughts were labeled as “unpleasant”. The tension in the forehead and stomach sensation werent that “unpleasant” by themselves.

Good. You can continue exploring the “unpleasantness” of the sensations but we can do also something else… Let’s change the experiment a bit. Next time someone seems annoying, don’t stay with the body for long. Look at the person.
What is actually there before the judgement?
What is directly seen/heard?
Where exactly is ‘annoying’?
Is ‘showing off’ in the tone of voice itself?
Can ‘rude’, ‘self-important’, ‘unpleasant’ be found in the sound?
Or are there sounds, expressions, movements — and then thought supplies the character and motive?
On a more practical level, would they be annoying if you we were in a better mood (thought stream a bit more cheerful that day)?
So notice this: does the thought ‘they are annoying’ tell you more about them, or about the current conditioning here?”

We can explore “others” in more detail if you like but in the meantime notice this too… The story about others is not “out there.” The interpretation is here. The separation is here. The expectation is here. The annoyance-image is here. The thought “This person talking like that is annoying” is here.
All of that appears in direct experience as thought, image, and sensation.
So when thought says “others are the problem”, “this is objectively not nice” look carefully:
Where is that story appearing? Here. Not outside, not inside.
The whole “me and others” bundle is carried as thought-content: memory, expectation, interpretation, separation, protection, threat, hope, disappointment.
It is like a backpack of old labels and assumptions that gets placed over colour, sound, and sensation. But in direct experience, what is actually found?
Does colour say “other”?
Does sound say “annoying”?
Does sensation say “they cause the unpleasantness”?
Does movement (colour change) say “there is an I inside them”?
Or does the backpack-story get added?
Look at the story of others as it appears here-now.
What is it made of? Mental image, thought, sensation, memory, expectation, interpretation (all thought).
Is there an actual other inside that story?
Is there an actual me inside that story?
Or is the whole separation a thought-bundle appearing now?
For next time, use a real present “other” if possible — someone neutral: a stranger, cashier, person walking by, family member, dog. Look directly:
What is actually here?
Can an “I” in them be found?
Can an “I” here be found?
What happens in sensation when thought says “they are like that and that”?
Then … Stay close to the body-map sensations, not the story.
Love
Rali