But what is it exactly that is stopping the next thought in the middle?
When there is a thought, how is it known that it’s just a half thought, an unfinished thought?
What is the actual experience of stopping the next thought in the middle?
I don’t know what is stopping a thought. I observed my thoughts some more and noticed I cannot tell where the middle of a thought is. But I can tell when there are a string of thoughts each related to another. Like for instance, this morning I began thinking about a situation where a company did damage to my car and is refusing to pay for it. I noticed thoughts becoming increasingly hostile and sensations of anger arising. I then told myself better to let it go for now rather than get worked up about it. It is easy to feel anger when this string of thoughts arise.
-Where does one thought end and another begin?
I don’t understand how the entire thought process works. To ask how do I know when one thought ends and another begins can be simply answered with ‘I don’t know.’ Which then leads to how do I know anything at all then? Another question I’ve tried to answer and still cannot.
-What is the AE of ‘willful intent’? Is it a sound, image/color, taste, smell, sensation or thought?
How is the ‘willful intent’ itself is experienced? Not the thought about it, not an explanation or description of it, but rather actual THE wilful intent itself?
It’s a thought. I don’t understand the mechanics of how it is experienced.
Thought 1: I will stop my thinking about the dishonest company.
Thought 2: Still feel sensation of anger.
Thought 3: new thoughts unrelated about what to do for the day.
Thought 4: ask myself am I hungry and what should I eat.
Thought 5: yep that company sucks, best to forget about it.
Thought 6: is a salad enough or eggs too
In the example above, I am unable to explain how each thought switched from one to another. What is said to be willful intent is just a thought description of what happened. In AE, there is just a blank. A nothingness.
-Does thought 2 or 3 stopped and avoided the thought 1?
Does thoughts have a power to avoid other thoughts?
No 2 and 3 do not avoid 1. I understand this part well.
But I don’t know where the power comes from to think “I’ll stop thinking about it”. In direct experience there is no explanation. Just blankness.
Is there any ACTUAL avoidance going on, or only thought 4 is talking ABOUT avoidance?
How avoidance as such be actually experienced?
Using the example of the company refusing to pay, the experience of not thinking about it anymore just happened. I did not avoid the initial thought about it. It happened and there is no taking it back. I agree thought 4 is just talking about it.
-Make a good note of this, since this will come up many times
Noted. It’s hard to distinguish at times. I see what you’re pointing to.
-How ‘thoughts being generated in the head’ is actually experienced?
Can thoughts being generated in the head’ experienced at all? Or only thoughts ‘suggest’ so?
I don’t know how they are being generated in AE. How do I experience anything? When I look, there is nothing.
-Is there a location where thoughts appear?
Yes, they happen in awareness. Where is awareness happening then? Inside of me, inside of my body. How can thoughts appear outside of myself? I wouldn’t be able to experience them if they did. What is this ‘me?’ I don’t know. In DE there is just blank.
Is there anything in experience that makes thoughts appear?
Is there anything in experience that generates thought?
What do you mean by experience? If there is experience of sensation of feeling cold. Then a thought says, “I feel cold I should get a jacket”. Did the experience of cold lead to the thought of getting a jacket? I ask honestly. In AE, this happened. If I look for why the thoughts happened, I don’t know. They just did. Why did I feel cold to begin with? Just did.
-If you cannot find a thinker, then how can you say that thinker appears in experience?
If you cannot find the thinker at all, then how is it known that it appears in experience at all?
Just because a thought ‘say’ so?f
I said so because thoughts happen in experience. But I was mistaken to say a thinker happens in experience. In AE, only a thought of a thinker exists in experience. Whether there is a thinker or not is still unknown.
What is the AE of this I-ness or me-ness? Is it a sound, image/color, smell, taste, sensation or thought?
I don’t know. When I look there is just another blank. Only after does a thought trying to describe it arise.
-thoughts are generated inside me” – what does the word ‘me’ points to in this sentence?
“inside me” – inside of what exactly?
I don’t know. Again, in AE there is nothing to be found.
-Or is there an unknown, un-experiencable entity or agency behind the scenes pulling the strings without this entity ever being seen, discovered and experienced?
Yes I agree with this statement more. I don’t know how or why anything happens at all.