The final push

[Vivien]

Hi Cal,

People name him Cal, see him as a self and he behaves etc.

But what does people name Cal? The body? Or they also IMAGINE that there is a person INSIDE the body, and they are addressing this inside entity?

After all, the images about ‘me’ that were being projected the whole time were always believed to be me. But then after a lot of looking, frustration, and some more looking, I realized that when the projection of the images stops (which sometimes happens), there is no me. I’m gone. Yet living continues.

It’s important to mention here to not fall into the trap of assuming that this mental image of me should be gone, in order to see that there is no self.

Since it doesn’t matter if a visual thought of me is there or not, since REGARDLESS of this image, there is no me.
So, please focus on the visual thought of me. And while focusing on it, investigate:

Is this image the self?
Is this image that thinks? Feels? Decides?

It’s important not to just quickly jump to the conclusion that ‘of course this image is not the thinker’. Rather stay with the image, and really investigate it experientially. Since this image provides the illusion, so it needs to be SEEN for what it is, and what is not.

Of course the me projections quickly return, but not with the same seriousness as before.

OK. Don’t try to push or make this image go away, rather investigate it curiously if it’s an actual self/me or not. Be glad that the image is there, since you have something to work with :)

It is as if the thoughts are constantly telling a story, a ‘me’ story. About how this ‘me’ experiences things and lives his life. And I know that this me doesn’t exist anywhere else but in this thought-story, but somehow there is still some clinging to this me.

You say “there is still some clinging to this me” – look for the one that is clinging.

What is it that is clinging to the me?

Is there another me outside of the story of me, who is clinging to the story of me?

And how does clinging itself is experienced?

[CalFatman]

Hi Vivien,

I had a pretty good looking session, in which things got quite clear at times. I tried to write down what I experienced:

There is a constant projecting of an image of the body as it is seen from the outside (a self-image). It feels as if the mental system wants to monitor what the me is doing all the time. Or to monitor how it is seen by others. There are feelings of anxiety and sadness that come up here, that have to do with being hurt and feeling not good enough. A drive for protection comes up in order to escape the unwanted thoughts and feelings. As if the image of how others see mee constantly needs to be in order, cannot reveal a weak spot. A realization comes up that many of the self-referencing thoughts are in place to guard ‘me’, constantly monitoring possible threats and unwanted thought/emotions, ready to jump in to action. A lot of tension and energy goes in to this.

What is it that is clinging to the me?
Is there another me outside of the story of me, who is clinging to the story of me?
And how does clinging itself is experienced?
The feelings of anxiety of is also were the clinging sensation comes from. The thoughts must be taken seriously, otherwise the defence system will fall apart and ‘I’ will be exposed to being hurt. And yes, looking closely it is seen that all this time there was an image of me looking at the workings of my inner world. And the fearful thoughts were urging me to believe them, or else. As a consequence, ‘I’ would feel bad, having all these negative feelings happening to me. It astonishing to realize the amount of work and energy (and creativity even) my thoughts put in to keep this whole ‘me’ story erected all the time!

Is this image the self?
Is this image that thinks? Feels? Decides?
So to answer these questions, the image is not the self. It was thought that the constant projection of the image of the body was the self, but it is seen now that it just some kind of mental functioning that happens. For some reason, the ‘mind’ projects a self-image the whole time. But this image does not think, feel, or decide. For example, feelings appear and they are quickly followed by an image of self as having the fear. Everything happens out of nowhere, by itself, but the self-thoughts are constantly translating it in to a me-centred story.
So I feel I’ve made a good step and have enough material for some further looking.

Thanks again for your time and your interesting pointers!

Cheers, Cal

[Vivien]

Hi Cal,

First, I would like to ask you to not bulk-reply. Always reply to each question one-by-one. Why? Because each question is a pointer for you where to look. And if you bulk-reply, it’s easy to miss some important pointers.

What is it that is clinging to the me?
Is there another me outside of the story of me, who is clinging to the story of me?
And how does clinging itself is experienced?

The feelings of anxiety of is also were the clinging sensation comes from. The thoughts must be taken seriously, otherwise the defence system will fall apart and ‘I’ will be exposed to being hurt. And yes, looking closely it is seen that all this time there was an image of me looking at the workings of my inner world. And the fearful thoughts were urging me to believe them, or else. As a consequence, ‘I’ would feel bad, having all these negative feelings happening to me. It astonishing to realize the amount of work and energy (and creativity even) my thoughts put in to keep this whole ‘me’ story erected all the time!

Here, you almost completely missed what the questions were pointing to.

The thoughts must be taken seriously, otherwise the defence system will fall apart and ‘I’ will be exposed to being hurt.

This is intellectualization, not coming from looking at experience.

And yes, looking closely it is seen that all this time there was an image of me looking at the workings of my inner world. And the fearful thoughts were urging me to believe them, or else. As a consequence, ‘I’ would feel bad, having all these negative feelings happening to me. It astonishing to realize the amount of work and energy (and creativity even) my thoughts put in to keep this whole ‘me’ story erected all the time!

This is also mainly intellectual.

I understand that you don’t like this image of fear of what others think of you, but it’s important to mention that this inquiry is not like therapy. We are not analysing how this happens. We are not trying to understand the mechanism. We are not doing this inquiry for getting rid of these unpleasant emotions.

Rather, we are looking for Cal, for the person, whom all this story is about. To see if Cal is a real entity, a real person, a real individual, or just a fictional character, with no roots in reality whatsoever.

So, please go back to these questions again, and look at them one-by-one. Focus on just one question at a time. And don’t go off track, focus where the questions are pointing to.

What is it that is clinging to the me?
Is there another me outside of the story of me, clinging to the story?
And how does clinging itself is experienced?

And you completely missed the first question. You really went off track. Please don’t try to fix the person, fix Cal, fix emotions, rather investigate if there is a Cal at all, who is feeling these emotions and who needs to be fixed.

So here is the first question you missed:

People name him Cal, see him as a self and he behaves etc.

But what does people name Cal? The body? Or they also IMAGINE that there is a person INSIDE the body, and they are addressing this inside entity?

Vivien

[CalFatman]

Hi Vivien,

My apologies, I misunderstood what you meant by bulk-reply before (I thought you meant don’t reply too often/lengthy. English is not my native language). And I certainly have a tendency to analyse, I’m an academic in daily life (a psychologist even). The parts where you said were intellectualization, I was not even aware I was doing that.

So I tried again, and while looking, using your questions, I suddenly realised what you meant: analysing the fear or trying to fix Cal really has nothing to with it. Here is what I wrote down during the looking:

But what do people name Cal? The body? Or they also IMAGINE that there is a person INSIDE the body, and they are addressing this inside entity?
When I look at other people I also think there is an entity inside that I address, so it’s probably the same for them. When I look at people (including myself) I think that there is a conscious agent that lives inside the body and deliberately thinks and acts. It’s different for animals or little children though, they seem to ‘just act’. When I try to look closely at what happens when people address me by my name, my self-images becomes ‘activated’ so to speak.

Is this image the self?
It seems to be only an image, a picture, a representation. It is not an image of something in the world. Apart from this image I can’t find anything that could be the self.

Is this image that thinks? Feels? Decides?
No, that also doesn’t seem the be the case. The image is a thought itself, popping up from out of nowhere without anything controlling it. It also doesn’t feel. If anything, it IS a feeling, being attached to the image. And also not deciding, decisions seem to happen by themselves, quickly followed by a thought that claims the decision. It suddenly becomes clear that the whole self-story is being portrayed after the fact. Everything happens by itself and then the narrating quickly follows, turning it in to a self-story.

What is it that is clinging to the me?
What I was trying to say in my previous post is that the me-image always comes with a feeling of anxiety. I always thought that as long as this anxiety is there, there is still a belief in me, and I would have to get rid of the anxiety first. I guess that’s why I had focussed so much on it in my previous post. And it also explains the clinging, the anxiety made the ‘I’ feel so real that I had the impression that something had to be psychologically resolved, before the I could go.

Is there another me outside of the story of me, who is clinging to the story of me?
But I realize now that’s all bogus. The anxiety, the self-image, the whole me-story, it’s only a projection. No matter how much clinging there is, it’s only always part of the story. You were right, all we need to do is look if Cal is real and it is seen now that he’s only a picture. He cannot act or think or feel. All this looking at Cal, trying very hard to understand his thoughts is all very funny and futile all of a sudden. It’s seeing behind Cal what matters.

And how does clinging itself is experienced?
Doesn’t mean that the self-image or the clinging is gone now. But it only happens in imagination. In fact, they are really no longer important.

I also realize that my expectations have been an obstacle. I guess I always expected that my anxiety would have to be gone and my mind would be open, without a self in there. But it’s different, everything is still as it was, it’s just that the self-thoughts are no longer believed. I’m curious how this will develop and whether I will flip-flop again. Sorry, I don’t think I replied to all your questions like you asked. It’s been quite a day actually. First I diligently looked at them and answered them, but then somewhere between question 3 and 4, when I realized: ‘the whole damn thing is just a image!’ my answers no longer made sense and wanted to rewrite parts, which also made no sense and no longer applied to the questions. Anyway, I hope you still want reply :/

Warm regards,
Cal

[Vivien]

Hi Cal,
You did a nice looking this time :)

My apologies, I misunderstood what you meant by bulk-reply before (I thought you meant don’t reply too often/lengthy. English is not my native language).

No problem. Your English is very good :)

And I certainly have a tendency to analyse, I’m an academic in daily life (a psychologist even). The parts where you said were intellectualization, I was not even aware I was doing that.

Yes, when we intellectualize we often don’t even notice it. If there is anything to learn with this inquiry, then it is to be able to differentiate between thinking (intellectualizing) and experiencing.

When I look at other people I also think there is an entity inside that I address, so it’s probably the same for them. When I look at people (including myself) I think that there is a conscious agent that lives inside the body and deliberately thinks and acts.

Yes, exactly, this is what most people believe. So this assumption is what needs to be tested. To see if this assumption can stand up to scrutiny of experience/reality.

Everything happens by itself and then the narrating quickly follows, turning it in to a self-story.

Yes, nice observation.

What I was trying to say in my previous post is that the me-image always comes with a feeling of anxiety. I always thought that as long as this anxiety is there, there is still a belief in me, and I would have to get rid of the anxiety first

The anxiety is there not because a person or me be being there, but because there is a wound ‘inside’ that is being touched by certain stimuli.

So yes, this anxiety can be dealt with psychological methods, but it’s presence or absence doesn’t make much difference in seeing no self. The anxiety can be dealt with sooner or later, but independently from this inquiry. If it’s very strong, as strong that it prevents looking, then it’s better before. But if it’s not that strong, it can be dealt with after. Usually it’s easier to deal with emotional pains, traumas after the self is seen through, since the core belief in the self is gone.

And it also explains the clinging, the anxiety made the ‘I’ feel so real that I had the impression that something had to be psychologically resolved, before the I could go.

This could happen even after seeing through the self illusion. Since every time our wounds are poked, the me could feel to quite real, because of the physical emotions that accompanies them. Since the sensations are real, actually happening, it can give the impression (the reality effect) to the illusionary me. That’s one of the reasons I say that seeing through the self is just the first step, just the beginning and not the end, because after we have to unlearn or deconstruct our conditionings.

But I realize now that’s all bogus. The anxiety, the self-image, the whole me-story, it’s only a projection. No matter how much clinging there is, it’s only always part of the story. You were right, all we need to do is look if Cal is real and it is seen now that he’s only a picture. He cannot act or think or feel. All this looking at Cal, trying very hard to understand his thoughts is all very funny and futile all of a sudden. It’s seeing behind Cal what matters.

Nice observations :)

The anxiety, the self-image, the whole me-story, it’s only a projection.

You often talk about projection. Probably it’s coming from your psychologist background. Which is a valid concept in the dream / story of me, but is there an actual root in reality?

What is it that is projecting the story?
Where is the projector?

Please don’t think, but really look for an actual projector.

I also realize that my expectations have been an obstacle. I guess I always expected that my anxiety would have to be gone and my mind would be open, without a self in there.

Your mind would be open? Do you think that there is such thing as mind, and this mind could be open or closed?

What is the mind in this very moment as you observe it?
Can you find a mind in reality?

No? Then how do you know that this unfindable mind is closed or not?
Is this something that can be experienced? Or just thought about and imagined?

Where is the exact location of this ‘mind’ which is supposed to be the placeholder and origin of thoughts?

Vivien

[CalFatman]

Hi Vivien,

Find below today’s homework: 😉

What is it that is projecting the story?
Where is the projector?
I really can’t find anything that is supposed to project the story, the thoughts. Nor any direction from which they are supposed to be projected. They just pop up from out of nowhere and a moment later, they are gone again. It’s a real mystery when you think about it. Maybe projections is not the right word, appearance might fit the description better.

Your mind would be open? Do you think that there is such thing as mind, and this mind could be open or closed?
When you closely, the mind as being a container or bubble or something in which thoughts appear doesn’t fit the experience at all.

What is the mind in this very moment as you observe it?
Can you find a mind in reality?
For example, when I think of my head as the place where my thought are in, an image of a dark space comes up, that is crowded with written sentences that float around. However, this image is of course not the mind, as it is also just an image that appears. The way I experience it is that thoughts are all over the place, floating all around my body in open space. But something of a container of those thought can’t be found anywhere.

No? Then how do you know that this unfindable mind is closed or not?
Is this something that can be experienced? Or just thought about and imagined?
What I meant with open mind was more that it is as if the density of the thoughts is less, there is more space between them. They are not so concentrated around my forehead and the area that they ‘occupy’ is wider, opener. This is actually what I have been experiencing today. A calmness, a greater acceptance for what appears.

Where is the exact location of this ‘mind’ which is supposed to be the placeholder and origin of thoughts?
So there is no mind. The word is only used for the sake of communication, so people know you talk about this ‘mental space’ to which only you have access. Like the word ‘I’ for referring to what is happening here.

I really like what you said about intellectualizing things. It is indeed the greatest obstacle to seeing it, and we don’t even know we’re doing it. Like the traditional mind/body dualism, which is something that we’ve been taught from a young age, but is really nothing more than a concept, a metaphor. And yet this concept has become how we actually see things, has become ‘stuck in our minds’ (hihi). Now we have start looking with a fresh pair of eyes to see how it really is, to get rid of all the conditioned ideas.

What do you think I should be focussing on next?

Thanks again for all your help!
Cal

[Vivien]

Hi Cal,

I really like what you said about intellectualizing things. It is indeed the greatest obstacle to seeing it, and we don’t even know we’re doing it. Like the traditional mind/body dualism, which is something that we’ve been taught from a young age, but is really nothing more than a concept, a metaphor. And yet this concept has become how we actually see things, has become ‘stuck in our minds’ (hihi). Now we have start looking with a fresh pair of eyes to see how it really is, to get rid of all the conditioned ideas.

Yes, nice observation :)

The way I experience it is that thoughts are all over the place, floating all around my body in open space.

Look at this a bit closer. Is this what is really happening?

Are thoughts really floating around the body in open space? Or is this coming from another visual thought / imagination?

Is there any location where thoughts appear? Any at all?

What I meant with open mind was more that it is as if the density of the thoughts is less, there is more space between them. They are not so concentrated around my forehead and the area that they ‘occupy’ is wider, opener.

Are you saying that thoughts literally can be contracted around the head? Is this so?

Are you talking about thoughts or about sensations?
When there is less contraction, isn’t it just less contracted sensation?
Isn’t this openness or wideness just more relaxed muscles in the forehead?

Do you see where I’m getting at? We are continuously misinterpreting our experiences and making up all sorts of stories, fantasies without actually seeing them to be fantasies.

Do you see that the reason you THINK that thoughts appear in and around the forehead is because of the contraction or relaxation of sensations in the forehead muscles?

So this sensation is being linked to thinking, with a conclusion that this sensation is the result of thinking?


Vivien

[CalFatman]

Hi Vivien,

Here the result of my looking session. Very interesting again!

"The way I experience it is that thoughts are all over the place, floating all around my body in open space."
Look at this a bit closer. Is this what is really happening?
Mmm… Well, no. Actually it isn’t.

Are thoughts really floating around the body in open space? Or is this coming from another visual thought / imagination?
To be honest, I can’t see my thoughts at all. They only become visual as soon as I imagine them to be visual. But in truth, I cannot find them at all. They’re there, obviously. But I have no idea how I’m perceiving them. It’s like I have a sixth sense that I didn’t know I had, capable of registering thought.

Is there any location where thoughts appear? Any at all?
I don’t know, I can’t locate them. They are like, in another dimension that I have access to (not literally of course). I’m aware of them, but it’s impossible to register what they look like or where they are. If I have a thought: ‘I’m gonna make a sandwich’ and I think about what it looks like, it turns in to a visual picture of a written sentence, or maybe of an image of me standing in the kitchen, making a sandwich. But before that, it was there, but I had no idea what it was. And yet the idea of making a sandwich was ‘known’.

Are you saying that thoughts literally can be contracted around the head? Is this so?
Well, no. This also no longer makes any sense now.

Are you talking about thoughts or about sensations?
It took me a while to see this. But the bodily sensations make up a lot more of the experience than I realised.

When there is less contraction, isn’t it just less contracted sensation?
There is an almost constant experience of a little tension in the forehead, front of the skull area.

Isn’t this openness or wideness just more relaxed muscles in the forehead?
Relaxation in this area is indeed experienced as openness. As if the sensation of tension forms a barrier, which is lifted when relaxed and as a result your consciousness ‘opens up’. Amazing how easily you fool yourself with these preconceived ideas!

Do you see that the reason you THINK that thoughts appear in and around the forehead is because of the contraction or relaxation of sensations in the forehead muscles?
Yes, I see it now

So this sensation is being linked to thinking, with a conclusion that this sensation is the result of thinking?
Yes. Man I feel stupid…

Interesting to realize that sensations make up a big part of the experience. Even the self-image consist mostly of simply the raw sensations coming from the body, that are quickly transferred in to the ‘me’ (my chest, my head, my body, etc.). Also kind of weird to realize that I have no idea what thought are, and I mostly have been turning them in to images.

Cheers!
Cal

[Vivien]

Hi Cal,

You did a nice investigation.

Yes. Man I feel stupid…

Can stupidity be felt? – do everything you can to feel stupid. How do you do that?
Or is this just a thought and not an actual feeling/sensation?

Interesting to realize that sensations make up a big part of the experience.

Yes. The self is not just simply thoughts, but also mislabelled sensations.

Bring up the memory which triggers an emotion. It can be any emotion.

Does it feel like that the me who is feeling the emotion is in the chest?

Whenever there is an emotion during the day, investigate this:

Which sensation feels to be the me who is having the emotion?

Vivien

[CalFatman]

Hi Vivian,

Can stupidity be felt? – do everything you can to feel stupid. How do you do that?
Well, I could go out somewhere and start embarrassing myself ;) Fortunately, I have already done many times before in my life so I can also just bring back the memory of one of those moments.

Or is this just a thought and not an actual feeling/sensation?
And I realise that stupid is indeed not the feeling. There are some feelings of course, but they cannot be called ‘stupid’. Stupid is more the interpretation of my actions in that whole situation. It’s more a label that’s being put on it.

Bring up the memory which triggers an emotion. It can be any emotion.
Does it feel like that the me who is feeling the emotion is in the chest?
First thing I notice is that the experience of the emotion is actually only sensations. Then quickly, almost instantly, the pattern of sensations are being interpreted and labelled as an emotion (joy, fear, etc). And quickly after that, the labelling ‘my emotion’ happens. But it doesn’t really feel as if the me is in the chest.

Whenever there is an emotion during the day, investigate this:
Which sensation feels to be the me who is having the emotion
The me is that label again, an image of my face/body that appears to claim the experience. But it doesn’t have a location. Then an interesting thought occurs: I want that image to be gone, because it hinders me to be free. And then: Who is this I that wants this this self-image to be gone? Two I’s, that shouldn’t be possible. Looking at this second I, it is seen that it is also only (another) self-image. But then: who is looking at this self-image then? Etc… So beyond a constant appearing series of self-images, there is no evidence of a me.

All the best,
Cal

[Vivien]

Hi Cal,

Stupid is more the interpretation of my actions in that whole situation. It’s more a label that’s being put on it.

Yes. Stupidity is just a concept, with a definition. Exists only in thinking, only in the virtual reality of thoughts. And if we take these concepts as facts, and identify with them by believing the thought “I am stupid”, we suffer. And we create our own suffering by not seeing these mental labels for what they are. Just concepts, without any root in reality.

First thing I notice is that the experience of the emotion is actually only sensations. Then quickly, almost instantly, the pattern of sensations are being interpreted and labelled as an emotion (joy, fear, etc). And quickly after that, the labelling ‘my emotion’ happens.

Nice observations.

The me is that label again, an image of my face/body that appears to claim the experience.

Are you sure that the image is claiming the experience? Can an image talk?
Does the image itself suggest in any way that it’s a me?
Or only verbal thoughts suggest so?

There is an image of the face and the body. But is there a subtitle or a tag on that image that “it’s me”? Or only verbal thoughts commenting on this image, with a statement “It’s me”?

Then an interesting thought occurs: I want that image to be gone, because it hinders me to be free. And then: Who is this I that wants this this self-image to be gone? Two I’s, that shouldn’t be possible. Looking at this second I, it is seen that it is also only (another) self-image.

Dear Cal, you mixing mental images with thoughts.

An image cannot talk, cannot do anything. Or can it?
Can you see that the image of the body/face doesn’t do anything? Or does it?

: I want that image to be gone, because it hinders me to be free

What is making this thought to appear? The image?
A self? A person? Cal? What exactly?

But then: who is looking at this self-image then? Etc… So beyond a constant appearing series of self-images, there is no evidence of a me.

The thing is that this is not really a looking. It’s an imagination. You are trying to image what is seeing the image, and then another mental image appears about look at the first image of the face/head.

When you look for the one who is looking at the image, don’t look for another image. Rather look for a sensation. Since it FEELS like as if the image is seen or looked at from a certain location in the head. And this location shows up as a sensation.

Experiment with this. Focus on FEELING, instead of imagining. Let me know what you find.

Vivien

[CalFatman]

Hi Vivien,

I need a little bit more time today, so I'll get back to you tomorrow.

Have a nice day!
Cal

[Vivien]

No problem, thank you for letting me know :)

[CalFatman]

Hi Vivien,

Here the result of my looking today.

“The me is that label again, an image of my face/body that appears to claim the experience.”
Are you sure that the image is claiming the experience? Can an image talk?
No, the image itself is standing still. Only an image indeed.
Does the image itself suggest in any way that it’s a me?
Well, no. It’s an image of the body and face but that itself does not tell it is me.
Or only verbal thoughts suggest so? There is an image of the face and the body. But is there a subtitle or a tag on that image that “it’s me”? Or only verbal thoughts commenting on this image, with a statement “It’s me”?
Wow, yes. Very subtle, without being aware of it, thoughts are telling it is me. My face, my body, my feelings, my thoughts. Basically every time the sense of me is present, it’s because thoughts are narrating about the me. That’s actually all the that the me is, thoughts.

An image cannot talk, cannot do anything. Or can it?
Can you see that the image of the body/face doesn’t do anything? Or does it?
Yes, it took a while to see the difference between images and thought. Has to do with the fact the my thoughts also appear as images often. But the images seem more stable and still, while thoughts are constantly changing, talking, commentating.

”I want that image to be gone, because it hinders me to be free”
What is making this thought to appear? The image?
A self? A person? Cal? What exactly?
It is a thought that appears out of nowhere. But quickly it is followed by a me-thought, telling that it is ‘I’ having the thought. That it belongs to me. The realisation occurs again how pervasive the me-narrative is.

When you look for the one who is looking at the image, don’t look for another image. Rather look for a sensation. Since it FEELS like as if the image is seen or looked at from a certain location in the head. And this location shows up as a sensation.

Experiment with this. Focus on FEELING, instead of imagining. Let me know what you find.
What I found here was that the image of me looking is for a great deal based on the sensation of the skin of my face and skull. I never paid much attention to the feeling of my skin, but if I focus on it, there is a subtle tingling on the surface of face and skull. It is always there. In reality when I look in to the world, it happens from out this sensation. The image that I conjure up when looking for the looker, is actually based on this sensation, I see now. It’s like this sensation visualized. I guess this has to do with how normal looking is experienced. Interesting.

Thank you!
Cal

[Vivien]

Hi Cal,

What I found here was that the image of me looking is for a great deal based on the sensation of the skin of my face and skull. I never paid much attention to the feeling of my skin, but if I focus on it, there is a subtle tingling on the surface of face and skull. It is always there. In reality when I look in to the world, it happens from out this sensation. The image that I conjure up when looking for the looker, is actually based on this sensation, I see now. It’s like this sensation visualized. I guess this has to do with how normal looking is experienced. Interesting.

You did a nice investigation :)

But the images seem more stable and still, while thoughts are constantly changing, talking, commentating.

Yes. We are going to investigate thoughts. Seeing thoughts clearly is essential part of the inquiry.

It is very important that you never think or ponder on the questions. Rather you actually have to look what you can see in your immediate experience before any thought interpretation.

Please always be thorough with looking. Look repeatedly several times before replying.

Please sit, doing nothing for a few minutes. Watch thoughts coming and going.

Can you trace a thought back to where it came?
In the same way, can you follow a thought to its destination?
Can you tell where thoughts come from and go to, without using any imagination or speculation?

Vivien