Hi Valentine,
I had the experience, not the thought, but the actual experience of an equality between my thoughts and the sound of an airplane overhead or the noise of a dog's claws on the pavement outside
great stuff!
Conceptually I see that these are just more thoughts but there is resistance. I need to stay with this.
Invite the resistance in to have its say - what is it exactly that is resisted?
It is worth reminding you of the obvious: we are only trying to find out what is the case.... we are not trying to change the world from one in which there
is free will to one in which there is
not. Neither are we trying to replace one fixed belief (free will) with some other fixed belief.
Conventional ideas around free will, fatalism and so on are really very crude - the reality is far subtler, and cannot be captured using these ideas. It is not a question of "A self with free will" vs "A self without free will", but a complex interplay between awareness, thought, expectation, sensation, memory, will, intention and so on, all going on without any central core of "self" running the show.
When questioning the reality of 'free will', it is so easy to imagine that if there is not a "self" freely directing operations, then there must just be awareness passively observing it all, like a ping-pong ball floating down a series of rapids. This is still dualistic, and effectively just treats 'awareness' as a separate, but impotent, 'self'. Giving up the delusion of self does not render one a passive observer, rather it opens the door to wholehearted spontaneity.
What ideas are wrapped up in this resistance? How well do these ideas capture your observed experience? Is it possible that the entire set of ideas around free will, morality, responsibility etc need to be not so much
contradicted on their own level, but replaced with more realistic ideas in the light of new experience? If so, can you find the courage to live with the uncertainty of unformed ideas for as long as takes for a new level of clarity to emerge?
when you say above: "can they be witnessed as thoughts, and released as thoughts?" does 'released' not imply intention, deliberation?
Thoughts are on their way out as soon as they arise - though sometimes clinging arises, which spawns a new set of thoughts.
When I wrote 'released', I really just meant 'allowed to pass without creating a new proliferation of clinging thoughts'.
You're right - 'released' does imply something more more deliberate, and this was not really what I had in mind - ideally, there is no grasping, and so no releasing either. There is also a kind of paradox - by the time the thought arises "I should drop that other thought!", the other thought has already passed....
That said, there is nothing taboo about intention or deliberation,
we are not trying to get rid of them or prove that they don't really exist... just to question, when there is intention or deliberation, whether there is really any "self" there driving them.
Best wishes,
Perry