Where am I?

[Unknown987]

Hi Vivien,
what I noticed looking at the I/me/self thoughts is that there are different kinds of 'me thoughts'. There is the thought "I like it", "I dislike it", or "I am right!", a very strong 'me thought'. It is related to reality and it is quite sticky. It triggers emotions, memories, it's based on the Claudio's character and the narration about him. Then there is the "I am doing" thought, that is the the thought about a me who is receiving/directing an experience. This is a strange and random thought. Sometimes it pops up, sometimes it doesn't. Today I wasn't able to understand why, so I need more looking. Then there is a third kind of 'me thought', that is the thought that plans and triggers anxiety. This thought is strange, it's always uncomfortable in the present moment, it's always projected in the next future ("I need to do this and that, I need to go NOW!") and it triggers judgmental thoughts. These are 3 kind of thoughts happened today, but there are others, I'm sure! :)

[Vivien]

Hi Claudio,

These are 3 kind of thoughts happened today, but there are others, I'm sure!

You are analysing thoughts and trying to put them into categories. What for?
Do you see that analysing the I-thought and trying to put them into categories are just more thinking?

Are there actually different type of thoughts in reality?
Or a thought is just a thought?

And the only difference is what the thought is ABOUT. Can you see this?

Is the about-part (the content of a thought) ever real?

Does it matter what a thought is about?

It’s time to stop analysing and categorizing thoughts along fictional concepts.
Rather, NOTICE when thoughts ABOUT analysing appear.

Isn’t analysing them are just more story about me? About Claudio?
How certain thoughts affect Claudio?

Do you see that this analysing is still happens in the dream?

Why not stop and just notice what is happening?

Vivien

[Unknown987]

Hi Vivien,

You are analysing thoughts and trying to put them into categories. What for?
Do you see that analysing the I-thought and trying to put them into categories are just more thinking?

Yes, you're right. I was looking at the (content of) Me thoughts and categorizing them. Just more thoughts.

Are there actually different type of thoughts in reality?
Or a thought is just a thought?

A thought is just a thought, nothing less nothing more. It' very easy to overlook this.

And the only difference is what the thought is ABOUT. Can you see this?

Yes, the content is the only thing that changes. So a generic thoughts and the I-thought is the same thing. It's a thought that arises and falls.

Is the about-part (the content of a thought) ever real? Does it matter what a thought is about?

No, it is based on something that was real but now is the past.
But can I ask you a question Viv? A thought is not REAL, but it can be USEFUL or TRUE, right? So the thing is about making a distinction between useful thoughts and sterile thinking... or instead everything is resolved always simply by looking? Should we use thought only for survival/social/everyday activities?

Isn’t analysing them are just more story about me? About Claudio?
How certain thoughts affect Claudio?

Yes, because they tell a story: how Claudio thinks, about what etc. So while looking dissolves the I-thought, thinking increases the I-thought.

Do you see that this analysing is still happens in the dream?
Why not stop and just notice what is happening?

Right, in reality is so simple: just look. But with thoughts which interfere with the process everything seems complicated.
In reality "Today is sunny", "I'm nice", "Claudio is smart", "I like ice cream", "The sun is hot and the sea is blue" are thoughts. It seems that every thought is a Me-thought, it tells the same story and it has the same value: it doesn't have a value. It exists, it arises and falls.

[Vivien]

Hi Claudio,

Yes, the content is the only thing that changes. So a generic thoughts and the I-thought is the same thing. It's a thought that arises and falls.

And this is what to be seen again and again and again, thousands of times.

But can I ask you a question Viv? A thought is not REAL, but it can be USEFUL or TRUE, right? So the thing is about making a distinction between useful thoughts and sterile thinking... or instead everything is resolved always simply by looking?

Let me reply with a question.

If were in the desert close to dying of thirst, would you be able save your life by THINKING about drinking water? Or would you need the real thing, the actual experience of water?

Also, try this out. Next time when you are hungry, don’t eat immediately. Just sit, and just think about eating. Don’t just think about it, but actually do it. You have to see this in reality, not just by thinking it through.

Can you satisfy your hunger by thinking of food? Or you would actually need to actually eat?

Should we use thought only for survival/social/everyday activities?

This questions assumes that there is a you, who has power over thoughts, and can choose using thoughts only for survival and social activities? But is this so?

Please don’t just quickly jump on intellectually saying, of course not, but really-really-really investigate it experientially.
Let me know what you find.

Yes, because they tell a story: how Claudio thinks, about what etc. So while looking dissolves the I-thought, thinking increases the I-thought.

Dear Claudio, sorry to say but you don’t even get on the intellectual level what seeing no self means. You are still under the impression that the I-thought needs to be dissolved by looking. But this cannot be further from the truth.

You are trying to manage the I-thought in every possible way. Analyzing it, putting into categories, lessening them, to think about it in thousands of ways, EXCEPT the only thing that would matter, just to notice them for what they are in the moment of happening.


It’s NOT about dissolving the I-thought, it’s not even about lessening the I-thought.
It’s about seeing the I-thought to be only a thought in the moment of happening.
Not dissolving it, not lessening it, not changing it, ONLY SEEING it for what actually is. Only a thought.

Please sit with this. Sit with this at least 15 minutes, or longer if it’s necessary, to REALLY SINK IN.

Vivien

[Unknown987]

Hi Vivien,

If were in the desert close to dying of thirst, would you be able save your life by THINKING about drinking water? Or would you need the real thing, the actual experience of water?

I'd need the experience of water, because thoughts has no "impact" on actual life/reality. And I would have an obvious question here, but I see the point: what for? "I am" here to look and notice, this would be just one more philosophical stream of thoughts.

Can you satisfy your hunger by thinking of food? Or you would actually need to actually eat?

Thinking of eating can't satisfy my hunger, rather it increases the craving for food.

This questions assumes that there is a you, who has power over thoughts, and can choose using thoughts only for survival and social activities? But is this so?

No, nobody can direct thoughts, I intended to say that thoughts can determine other thoughts. For example, "I am" here on LU with you because a certain kind of things happened: emotions, thoughts, questions, readings, books etc. All these things lead "me" to sign in on this website and to be guided by you in this "path".
Having said that, today I spent some time looking at thoughts and it's impossible to choose which thoughts, when, whit who. During a looking of the "present moment" there are feelings, hearings, sometimes a memory, then another thought, then a smell etc. Thoughts just arose and dissolved, casually, randomly.

[Vivien]

Hi Claudio,

It’s NOT about dissolving the I-thought, it’s not even about lessening the I-thought.
It’s about seeing the I-thought to be only a thought in the moment of happening.
Not dissolving it, not lessening it, not changing it, ONLY SEEING it for what actually is. Only a thought.

Please sit with this. Sit with this at least 15 minutes, or longer if it’s necessary, to REALLY SINK IN.

Has this sunk in?

No, nobody can direct thoughts, I intended to say that thoughts can determine other thoughts. For example, "I am" here on LU with you because a certain kind of things happened: emotions, thoughts, questions, readings, books etc. All these things lead "me" to sign in on this website and to be guided by you in this "path".

This is logical thinking, can you see this?

Having said that, today I spent some time looking at thoughts and it's impossible to choose which thoughts, when, whit who. During a looking of the "present moment" there are feelings, hearings, sometimes a memory, then another thought, then a smell etc. Thoughts just arose and dissolved, casually, randomly.

Continue observing thoughts, especially the thoughts of I/me/my/mine.
Don’t do anything with them. Don’t analyse, don’t categorize.
The only task is to notice them when they appear, to see them to be only thoughts.
Let me know what you find.

Vivien

[Unknown987]

Hi Vivien,

Has this sunk in?

Yes, the I-thought is only a thought, this is what emerge from looking it for what it is.

This is logical thinking, can you see this?

Yes, it's (again) logical thinking. :(

Continue observing thoughts, especially the thoughts of I/me/my/mine.
Don’t do anything with them. Don’t analyse, don’t categorize.
The only task is to notice them when they appear, to see them to be only thoughts.
Let me know what you find.

Ok, the moment "I" don't do anything with a thought it is seen for what it is, it fades away, as any other phenomenon. If a thought is not analyzed, or not categorized, then it "becomes" like a sound: temporary. It's empty, it happens then maybe is replaced by another thought, or maybe not. It's unpredictable.

[Vivien]

Hi Claudio,

Ok, the moment "I" don't do anything with a thought it is seen for what it is, it fades away, as any other phenomenon. If a thought is not analyzed, or not categorized, then it "becomes" like a sound: temporary. It's empty, it happens then maybe is replaced by another thought, or maybe not. It's unpredictable.

Dear Claudio, you might not see it, but you are still analyzing it, by comparing it.

The reason I gave you the exercise to observe thoughts is to see that you cannot be the thoughts if you are noticing them to arise. You cannot be something you are seeing to happen on its own. Also you cannot do something (thinking) if you see it happen on their own.

By this, I’m not trying to imply that there is a you watching or observing thoughts. Since that would be just a step closer to truth as a temporary landing point.

But in your case this landing point could be quite useful, since the reason why you are still on the intellectual level is because you are not seeing clearly that thoughts are not something you do, you are not seeing that they always happen on their own, they are NEVER your doing.

So turn the attention on noticing this. Not just when looking, but in the midst of your everyday life.
What do you do exactly for thoughts to appear?
Do you do anything at all?
Do you have anything to do with the appearance of thoughts?
Are they your doing?
Or you don’t do anything at all at any time for any thought to happen?

Vivien

[Unknown987]

Hi Vivien,
Unfortunately I need to postpone my reply (again). Here in Italy the quarantine is finished, so now I have less time available. I’ll write to you tomorrow, maybe in the morning.
Have a nice day!

[Vivien]

No problem, thank you for letting me know.

Have a nice day,
Vivien

[Unknown987]

Hi Vivien,

you cannot be the thoughts if you are noticing them to arise.

Yes, this is something that is noticed. :)

What do you do exactly for thoughts to appear?

I took you literally and I tried to generate a thought. This is what happened: There was the reading of your question, then a thought popped up: "I need to create a thought about something". Then no thoughts appeared. When there was an effort to focus on the thought "I need to create a thought about something" to really create that thought, everything dissolved and the same thought "I need to create a thought about something" re-popped up. But since there was an effort to create a thought, no thought was created. Thoughts appeared in the midst of my everyday life, when attention went on other things. So during the everyday life, there was this OVERLAID layer of random thought which randomly and independently popped up.

What do you do exactly for thoughts to appear?
Do you do anything at all?

Nothing can be done. Even if I think "Now I'm going to think something" the result is that it was only a thought, no entity owns that thought. It is a thought which evokes a Me that doesn't exist. And then no thought is produced "on command".

Do you have anything to do with the appearance of thoughts?
Are they your doing?
Or you don’t do anything at all at any time for any thought to happen?

Yes, this is only a thought taken for granted, that there is a Me that thinks. But thinking actually works on its own.
P.S. Thank you for your patience.

[Vivien]

Hi Claudio,

Nothing can be done. Even if I think "Now I'm going to think something" the result is that it was only a thought, no entity owns that thought.

And what is making the thought “now I’m going to think something” into existence?
This is a very literal question.

What we are investigating is how thoughts manifest. If there is a thought-generator that is making thoughts into existence. Is there?

Does thinking involve any doing?

Are thoughts are done (being thought) or given (appears automatically on their own)?

Spend a whole day looking at thoughts as often as possible. No matter what you do in your daily life, just notice thoughts, again and again, and again and again….. and again…. and more….

Vivien

[Unknown987]

Hi Vivien,

And what is making the thought “now I’m going to think something” into existence?

Nobody makes that thought. It's impersonal. The Me who is "going to think" is located in the content of the thought, it's not real.

What we are investigating is how thoughts manifest. If there is a thought-generator that is making thoughts into existence. Is there?

Maybe into the deepest black before each thought there is a "tought-generator", but what is experienced is an automated process. If I can make a simile it is like eye blinking: it happens without any doer.

Does thinking involve any doing?

It really doesn't.

Are thoughts are done (being thought) or given (appears automatically on their own)?

I can't say they are given, otherwise it would seems that there was a receiver of thoughts. They are not done, for sure, by anybody. Thoughts 'blossom' on their own.

[Vivien]

Hi Claudio,

I can't say they are given, otherwise it would seems that there was a receiver of thoughts. They are not done, for sure, by anybody. Thoughts 'blossom' on their own.

Is this a logical conclusion, or it’s clearly seen experientially without any doubt that thoughts are not done, but appear automatically on their own?

Can you know what is going to be your next thought before it appears?
Do everything you can to know your next thought before it appears.

Is life happening to the thought of I?
If not, what does life happening to?

Be very careful not to go to thinking, but rather really investigate what is present here in this very moment BEFORE any thought interpretation.

Vivien

[Unknown987]

Hi Vivien,

Is this a logical conclusion, or it’s clearly seen experientially without any doubt that thoughts are not done, but appear automatically on their own?

This simply comes from looking, so yes, no logical conclusion here. :)

Can you know what is going to be your next thought before it appears?

Actually this is a very useful exercise, and the more easy way to notice the impossibility of a doer. If "I" put effort into knowing the next thought, or generate it, the result is a frustrating void. Nothing happens, no infos. I cannot know the next thought, they are simply generated by themselves, following their own "rules" and methods.

Is life happening to the thought of I?

Well, in this sense looking is a ruthless practice. The I-thought doesn't receive anything, this is almost easy to see.

If not, what does life happening to?

Yesterday I read this thing: a human body is just a container for 5 senses, so these senses can experience the world. And the more I look the more I see this. This body is not made for ME, for letting me experience the world. Actually it is the exact opposite.
Life happens to nobody, in life there is only the living, not the liv-er (ahah not the organ!) or the lif-er, or any doer or receiver. It happens THROUGH this body, AS this thoughts, sensations, emotions, senses.