Lets try this again..

[ttrp]

no there is no "meaning" outside of thoguhts about it. and that has been a disturbing idea. if I just disregard it... I'm left with what is in front of me or whatever I'm doing. no bigger picture


when noticing zooming.. I still get the sense that there is a "place" zooming is happening to. like.. a camera zooms in and out.. and the camera is the "center" of the zooming


"im still here"... hmmm this is going to be interesting :) still working on this


if I look at those thoughts.. they just sit in existence.. along with everything else.. whatever that is


mind weather is interesting.. because that is how it is. its so easy to get stuck in "oh Im anxious therefore I am an anxious person' when Im not in an anxious mood I am not an anxious person...


you're right all those things you describe DO just happen..

[Jack'n'theBox]

no there is no "meaning" outside of thoguhts about it. and that has been a disturbing idea.

Right “meaning” is a mental construct. That’s what thought deals in – constructs or fabrications.


Let’s look more closely at thought – can there be more than one thought in awareness at any moment?
Can you find a connection between thoughts?

if I just disregard it... I'm left with what is in front of me or whatever I'm doing. no bigger picture

Well you are left with direct experience, not filtered through thoughts and ideas.
What if thoughts aren’t yours – they just arise and pass away – like clouds in the sky?
Can you find a think-er – an entity that produces these thoughts?

when noticing zooming.. I still get the sense that there is a "place" zooming is happening to. like.. a camera zooms in and out.. and the camera is the "center" of the zooming

Ok that’s fine – what we’re looking to find out is whether there is some entity that is controlling the camera – pushing the “zoom” button.

If we are out for a walk and you are taking in the scenery in a zoomed-out kind of way and I say, “Hey look at that bird” – does some entity push a button somewhere – or does attention just zoom in?

Just notice how attention moves in and out throughout the day – can you find anything that controls attention?

"im still here"... hmmm this is going to be interesting :) still working on this

Is the thought “I’m still here” constantly present? Indeed is thought constantly present? Not sure if you work out or play sport or do art – but notice that there are times when any thoughts about the “I” doing stuff are absent – indeed when you are in “the zone” of some activity – thought is absent.
Does the “I” exist outside of thought?

[ttrp]

no I cannot see a connection between the thoughts. sometimes contradictory thoughts can come up . non-sensical thoughts come up. thoughts about 2 different things can exist. blue elephants and the River Thames can come up simultaneously.

trying to find the thinker of thoughts is like a dog chasing its tail.. the next uestion that comes up "who is looking for the thinker of thoughts" . There is no thinker of thoughts. They come and go. Getting that familiar feeling but I think getting closer. tension is arising "who is that feels sad/happy" what is it that dictates a behaviour. What is "controlling" someone who is successful/unsuccesful. How much of our life is just chance of what these bodies do..



I cna't find any controller attention. But there is the observer of the attention.


no... "im still here" isn't always present and you're right.. despite it frequently being there in my experience.. it is not always. when I play music, or am immersed in a movie, or any activity "I" is absent. seeking to get back to this state more frequently is what brought me on this journey in the first place.


I does not exist outside of thought. If I were to remove the thought for example... I see a plate.. I drank milk.. I am typing.. those things just go on.

Thought really wants to be the hero of this story though. it can't just be a bag of chips. those are "My" or "I" am looking at them.

[Jack'n'theBox]

OK some great looking going on today.

Thought really wants to be the hero of this story though. it can't just be a bag of chips. those are "My" or "I" am looking at them.

Yes -- really acute observation here.

So before I reply to some of the point you just made -- let's push on with thought a bit more --

These thoughts that say they run the show -- are they aware of anything?

Can thought think?

[ttrp]

hmm it appears I missed something and my post didn't go through again. I'll respond with what I had when I have some time in a few hours

[ttrp]

the thoguhts... aren't aware of anything.. they're like. the result of awareness? or observation? and sometimes they're completely unfounded.

a thought cannot think. but it is easy to think that a thought is thinking because of the cause and effect thinking has. a chain of thoughts can seem sequential and therefore logical


but a thought just comes by.. it doesn't "create" another thought in the way I can create a fire with a stick

[Jack'n'theBox]

OK some really good observation going on.

We saw there was no "meaning" outside thought. Can you find "logic" outside thought? Can you find anything (outside thought) that thoughts are "founded on"?

Let's focus on WHEN thoughts are happening.

Just sit quietly and try to find the present moment. Focus on NOW. Does "now" have a duration?

What is your experience now of anything past?

What is your experience now of anything future?

Do now/past/future exist outside thought -- or are they just concepts?

[ttrp]

no.. there is no logic outside thought. logic is just a series used to describe events AFTER they occur (or how we predict they WILL occur)

no nothing thoughts are founded on... they have a way of feelign they are "inside". "inside" my head, or experience.


now does not have a duration. it is just the moment happening, with occurences shifting around it


there is no experience now of anything past.. there is thoughts of past and the emotional occurence (pain) that happens because of those thoughs ABOUT past

the experience future is just thoughts "about" a possible future.. that causes anxiety


I can mentally understnad that now/past/future are just concepts. I can observe my table and it just is as it is.. and I can add a story that it was this.. or that it could be like this in the future

[Jack'n'theBox]

OK great to notice that thoughts about past and future cause pain and anxiety.

Can you find any actual 'thing' (outside of thought) that exists in the past and in the future?

Does 'me' or 'I' have a past or future?

To help with this -- look at WHERE thoughts are happening.

Can you sense a kind of 'space' in which they arise?

Is this space a 'thing' that moves through time?

Is this space itself ever affected by the content of thought?

[ttrp]

no. all things are in th present moment. change happens in different moments but it is continuously the present moment


the past or future I has is ONLY projection of past or future. I can describe what I will do or what I have done

ok this next bit is where it gets tricky

I don't see a "where" that thought occurs.. its just of my phenomena and I can't find a location no matter how hard I look. there is a space in the sense that if Im experiencing it, it must exist

but no.. I don't think i is a thing that moves through time, not like a solid object

the space is not effected, but perceptions and ideas of self are affected y content of thought.

[Jack'n'theBox]

the past or future I has is ONLY projection of past or future. I can describe what I will do or what I have done

This “I” that can describe what “I” did or will do – what is that exactly?
Is there an actual “I” or just thoughts about an “I”.

I don't see a "where" that thought occurs.. its just of my phenomena and I can't find a location no matter how hard I look.

OK great. “where” suggests there is a fixed location for experience – but can you find a fixed location for any thought/sensation or feeling? Let’s have a look by trying this exercise:


The fullness of “experience” as it arises in awareness is like a symphony – there are maybe 30 different “instruments” (sensations/feelings/thoughts) all “playing” (arising) simultaneously. You can be aware of the symphony playing in its totality but at times certain instruments (trumpets, drums, bass etc.) may rise into prominence and be more apparent. When this happens you don’t stop hearing the entire symphony. It is still there. It’s just that a certain instrument, or a certain melody or refrain arises, and is more apparent for a while, then recedes again as some other sound in the symphony arises to take its place. Your “experience” is like this symphony. All the sensations that enter through the 5 sense gates and thoughts generated by mind are always already co-present in awareness. But certain aspects of experience, like a sound, an itch, a flashing light, may arise and for a moment become more apparent – but you never lose sight of the wholeness of experience as it arises in awareness -- there is always a 'spaciousness' there no matter how narrow the focus may seem to be.

Just like with listening to the symphony, “you” don’t need to “do” anything to notice the moderations in the sound – they simply arise in experience and become more or less apparent. Same with sensations arising in experience. Just find that space in which sensation arises and allow the symphony to play out – notice how different aspects of experience arise and recede but don’t follow them, don’t grasp on to them. Don’t label them.

Is the space in the room affected by the sound of the instruments?

Is the space in which the symphony of your experience plays out ever affected by any sensation or thought?

[ttrp]

the I that describes is just more thinking...


no. here is no fixed location for thought. this is something that troubled for a long time. I never understood thought and was always trying to figure out what it is.. or where it is.. and it was always a struggle .. its so strange to have this extra sensation on top ofeverythign else that doesn't exist... but still is experienced. thats so bizarre

I had trouble with rsymphony example, although I understood it.

These exercises show just how quickly mind is to begin labelling things. so automatically that it occurs before I even know it occurs, and preconceptions and ideas are already imprinted onto(over) experience.

the space in the room is not affected.

you're right, the experience is there but sensation and thought occurs simultaneously

[Jack'n'theBox]

the I that describes is just more thinking...

Right, so can you find an “I” outside of thoughts about an I?

no. here is no fixed location for thought. this is something that troubled for a long time. I never understood thought and was always trying to figure out what it is.. or where it is.. and it was always a struggle .. its so strange to have this extra sensation on top ofeverythign else that doesn't exist... but still is experienced. thats so bizarre

Well thought does exist. Sometimes there are thoughts sometimes there aren’t. Thoughts arise in experience just as sensations and feelings do. Thoughts have their place. For example “I need to catch the 8.02 train to make my appointment” is a useful thought. “I hate everything about my life” is a different story altogether.

Thoughts are only a problem when they are taken as expressions of some “person” – but can you find the “person” that thought refers to?
Thoughts arise – but is there a think-er pushing them out? Can you find a think-er?

These exercises show just how quickly mind is to begin labelling things. so automatically that it occurs before I even know it occurs, and preconceptions and ideas are already imprinted onto(over) experience.

OK so a sensation is an arising in experience that can be seen. The labelling of the sensation is another arising in awareness that can be seen. Labelling isn’t the problem (can “you” stop labelling?). The problem is believing the labels, like “Oh no here’s that annoying person.” The thought “annoying person” and associated feeling may simply appear – but from the perspective of the “space” in which they appear do these thoughts/feelings need to be acted upon? Can they simply be observed?

the experience is there but sensation and thought occurs simultaneously

You may want to look at this a bit more: is the arising of a sensation/feeling and the labelling of it really simultaneous (remember, a “symphony” must still be played note by note).

[ttrp]

no I outside of thoughts. it is created in thoughts. there is the body , that mind determines is I

the thign that gets me about thought is the personalization.. if thoughts are real.. how is it that there are thoughts that only "I" recieve. what is that "I" that sees the bird from this paticular vantage point or has this point of view. thats the big mystery to me

no no thinker. this is always confused me. where are they coming from, why do they have a voice.. when I think "who thnks that" then I think "who is it that hears it " and it is a never ending cylce. what is recieving or sending? who is the response in mind

yes feelings can be just observed and I noticed that the labellig is always AFTER even if it is "in the moment"

[Jack'n'theBox]

the thign that gets me about thought is the personalization.. if thoughts are real.. how is it that there are thoughts that only "I" recieve. what is that "I" that sees the bird from this paticular vantage point or has this point of view. thats the big mystery to me

Well thoughts are as real as any other sense arising. If your foot hurts only you know that. If you are sad today only you know that. If you have the thought “I’ll have pizza for dinner” only you know that.
So the question is “Does there need to be a YOU in order for knowing to happen?

no no thinker. this is always confused me. where are they coming from, why do they have a voice.. when I think "who thnks that" then I think "who is it that hears it " and it is a never ending cylce. what is recieving or sending? who is the response in mind

Well you put your finger on the problem when you say “When I think . . . ” – thought works with language and language is based on (false/imagined) dualities. You can’t look to thought to sort this out. It’s the wrong instrument.

Remember the “it’s raining” example?

This implies there is a thing (subject) that is doing something (raining) – but there is no “it’ there doing anything – it’s simply a function of language.

Similarly “I am thinking” implies a subject, an “I” that is engaging in some process (thinking) – but there is no “I” to be found – thoughts simply arise and pass away – there is no entity that can be said to be pushing out the thoughts like we might turn a wheel to churn out sausages!

This is how the Buddha put it in one of his shortest and most direct dialogues:

“Bāhiya, you should train yourself thus:
In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen.
In reference to the heard, only the heard.
In reference to the sensed, only the sensed.
In reference to the cognized, only the cognized.
That is how you should train yourself.
When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Bāhiya, there is no you in connection with that. When there is no you in connection with that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress.”
So check this in your own experience:

Seeing happens – can you find a see-er
Hearing happens – can you find a hear-er
Feeling happens – can you find a feel-er?
Thinking happens – can you find a think-er?

Is some kind of background, independent entity necessary for all this to happen or does experience just "show up" by itself?