Writing about it, thinking about it are actions in relation to the notions pursued and treated, but such actions do not mean that these notions are realised or accomplished once and for all. So to write of a notion, to show your seriousness about it, is still a way of pretending to the corresponding thought, pretending to be the thinker implicit in that thought. In fact you know nothing and are nothing, and every thought of yours remains in some degree, consciously or unconsciously, hypothetical, an essay at thought and at being its thinker; every assertion still in some measure a question. (But hasn't this insight, or something very like it, become widespread in the epidemic of uptalking?) The inner being is moved around slightly in this way and you want to see what will arise from this tiny difference in orientation or polarisation. The enquiry must be sincere, but at the same time the sincerity of the inquiry is in principle the very thing it is set to overturn. Sincerity is a three-dimensional concept, but whatever this is you know only two, and even those might collapse. It is absurd to expect the conjurations of a dream character to open the door to awakening. The dream character, that is, you, keeps worrying at something, something not quite right, whatever it is that keeps him from resting content; he keeps trying to get it in his sights, that's what's happening right now ... but only when he is thoroughly baulked and falls back, stops, gives up, in that brief pause, is there any chance ...