Tag: thoughts

Thoughts and space

moe Leave a comment

minority_report_gestural_ui.jpg

In continuing to explore thoughts, I keep discovering how thoughts first create a sense of extent and space, and then use this space to map perception and thoughts themselves.

For instance, all perceptions get mapped onto space, which also allows for a sense of I and Other. I, as a separate self, is located here, in the center, somewhere in or around this body and especially this head, and Other is out there, in the periphery, as anything else arising. A sense of extent allows for an easier differentiation, and it also allows for a sense of an I with an Other.

And thoughts in general also get spread out in space. When I notice the play of thoughts and images arising, and how the mind creates connections among them and shift from one set to another, it is very clear how the mind spreads thoughts – mimicking any and all senses – out in space, and then uses it as a canvas for shifting focus around, for exploring relationships, and so on.

At least for now when I explore it, it seems very similar to the gestural interface used in Minority Report. A wide range of images and information are spread out in space, and manipulated in space to make sense of it.

Thoughts as sense field

moe Leave a comment

When I first learned the labeling practice, differentiating the six sense fields of sensation, taste, smell, sound, sight and thought, thoughts came up saying thought, that is not really a sense field, but OK, I can see it can be called that to not make it too complicated.

But the more I explore thought, the more I come to see it as a sense field, similar to the others in several ways.

The thought field is similar to the other fields in that it…

  • Is content of awareness, just like sensations, sight, etc.
  • Comes and goes on its own, lives its own life on its own schedule, as the other ones
  • Really just mimic the other fields, with visual thoughts (visualizations), auditory thoughts, and so on.

So in immediate awareness, the thought field is not so different from the other sense fields.

Yet it is also different in an important way.

Thoughts create an overlay onto the other sense fields, sometimes making it difficult to sort out what is what unless we look. This is how conglomerates are made, or gestalts taken as solid and real and “out there” in the world if not noticed as gestalts, or as simply an appearance made up of for instance sensation and thought when they are.

This is how an emotion comes to appear as real and substantial in itself, when it is really just a sensation and a story.

(Most obviously, the label, the story of which emotion it is. Then, possibly stories saying it shouldn’t be there or go away, which creates resistance which in turn makes it appear even more substantial and real. And then also, initially and often fueled throughout the process, the stories of how what is or what may be should be different, which triggered the emotion in the first place.)

And also a sense of extent, of perception spread out in space and each one appearing in a different location in space. Of continuity, a stitching together of thoughts such as memories of what was, thoughts of what is (which is really just a memory of what just was), and scenarios of what may be. Of an inside and outside, formed by an imaginary boundary which lassoes certain areas of the sense fields saying it is inside (a selection of sensations, sounds, sights, tastes and smells, which thoughts say comes from this human self, and also most or all thoughts.) Of a center and periphery, with the center located in a specific place in space. Of subject and object, with the subject often located in space at or close to the center. And finally, of an I and Other, which is created through imaginary boundaries such as inside/outside, of an overlay of center/periphery, and subject/object.

The safety of having it all figured out

moe Leave a comment

A few weeks ago, I talked with someone who had it all figured out. For every topic, she seemed to have a flow chart ready in her mind, rattling off the lists and the flows. It was impressive and slightly disturbing at the same time, especially as I could see myself so clearly in her…. as this blog itself is evidence for:

Something is alive for me in immediate awareness, often outside of thoughts, but then quickly gets channeled into sorting and mapping and figuring it all out, creating a sense of control and safety that way.

But is it really all that safe to have it all figured out?

If I get caught up the creations of my own thoughts, I am blinded by it. I won’t so easily see what is outside of the terrain it maps out, including the truth in the many reversals of the initial stories. Also, if I take it all as real and true, it tends to clash with the world as it shows up on its own, which then trigger reactive emotions. I identify with and get caught up in these reactive emotions since I identified with the belief triggering them in the first place, and this only blind me further.

So in the sense of the safety of this human self, getting all fascinated by how the mind can figure things out is not necessarily safe. It may illuminate some things, but it certainly blinds me as well.

Also, does having it all figured out mean I don’t have to experience fear?

When I tell myself I have it all figured out, it seems that everything is under control. I don’t have to experience fear anymore. But it is still there, I am only distracting attention away from it.

And having it all figured out in itself creates fear. I am afraid that I got it wrong, and know somewhere I inevitably did. I am afraid life will show up differently from my neatly worked out map, which it, again, inevitably will. So both before and when my map falls apart, there is fear. And then there is the stress of having to try to keep it all together, even as it falls apart.

Having it figured out may look appealing, especially to the world of thought, and especially in our culture which places so much emphasis on it and trust in it.

But when I look at it a little more closely, I see that it can easily blind me, and it does not help avoid having to experience fear or anything else I would rather not experience.

Read More

Feldenkrais and body image

moe Leave a comment

I am getting back into the Feldenkrais lessons/explorations again through a friend studying to become a Feldenkrais practitioner and also classes just down the street.

These sessions are great opportunities to explore body image and how this mind creates an image of the body and uses it in different ways.

Some of the things I notice…

  • Thoughts create a visual image of the body. This one is most easily noticeable when the eyes are closed, but can also be noticed as an overlay over the visual perceptions when the eyes are open.
  • This image provides mapping for sensations
  • It is used for anticipating or remembering movements, visualizing what can be or was
  • It serves as a guide for attention, for instance when we are instructed to bring attention to our left foot
  • And it also serves as a map for a sense of subject and object. Each of these are located in different areas of space and the body, creating a sense of distance between the two, which also makes it possible to differentiate the two. Without a sense of distance between them, no subject or object.
  • When I explore the sense of subject and object, I notice the visualization of a fuzzy boundary around the head area serving as a location for a subject, seer, and doer. And the rest, such as other locations of the body and also the wider world, then becomes object and seen. If attention is brought to this sense of subject, the boundary shifts (usually to slightly in front of and above the head) and what previously appeared as subject now becomes an object. The specifics of how this works is probably different for different people, and changes over time as well.
  • All of this happens on top of basic visual thoughts of extent or space, which allows us to experience perception as spread out in space and located in different areas of space. These are basically visualizations of space, which allows us to map perceptions on top of it.

Noticing how thoughts create an appearance of space

moe Leave a comment

Here is an experiment I have found useful for noticing how thoughts create an appearance of extent or space.

Close your eyes, and visualize the room you are in. Notice how any sounds and other sensory inputs are imagined to occur in particular locations within this space. And notice how the experience of space, and of perceptions being located within this space, all comes from imagination, from visual thoughts.

Then open your eyes, and see if you can notice how there is pure perception, and also an overlay of this same image of space, which then helps spread out, organize and locate the various perceptions in different locations in space.

With some practice and exploration, it is possible to experience directly this overlay, and see that it comes only from thoughts.

Just a thought?

moe Leave a comment

When we see for ourselves, even to some extent, that the sense of separate self, and also space and continuity, and much more, all comes from thoughts, it can be a little shocking at first. After all, we typically see thoughts as just the verbal type, the one that it seems “I” am thinking and producing, consciously. How can that thought create this sense of separate self, and space and continuity, which seems so substantial and real? It doesn’t make sense.

And it doesn’t make sense, because the thoughts producing all these core beliefs and experiences are of a different type. They are not verbal. They are rarely if ever consciously noticed. They are certainly not produced by me, consciously. And they underlie our whole experience of the world, throughout the day and even in our dreams at night.

For me, these thoughts are image thoughts, and they organize a whole elaborate system of other thoughts, which all filter perception in a certain way, making this filtered perception appear very real and substantial. So real, in fact, that it is rarely if ever questioned. And if it is, then usually only in an intellectual way, as a fun idea to play around with.

It is quite different to notice it as it happens, through for instance labeling practice or choiceless awareness, or any other practice that helps us differentiate pure perception and thoughts. (Thoughts themselves are also within the field of perception, but for this purpose it helps to differentiate that one into two.)

Now, we can see the thought image of space overlaid on perception, allowing perception to appear spread out and be localized in particular places in space. We can see how thoughts create the appearance of continuity and time through memories. And we can see how a sense of a separate self is created through image thoughts of a center in space, of an inside and outside, of a subject and object, and other similar ones all contributing to creating a sense of a separate self, and of a doer responsible to thoughts, choices, behaviors and so on.

Language and thoughts

moe Leave a comment

rosetta_stone.jpg

Some pretty basic things about language and thoughts, easily noticed through a labeling practice…

Language (as defined very generously) helps us communicate with ourselves and others.

When I use language to communicate with myself, it helps with mapping, navigating, orienting and functioning in the world. And this self-talk comes in two forms: non-discursive and discursive, or non-verbal and verbal.

Since thoughts mimic the (other) sense fields, the non-discursive language takes the form of thoughts of sound, sight, smell/taste and sensation. It is non-discursive, so most animals probably have this form of language, at least to some extent. When our cat recognizes the sound of our car, it uses sound thoughts, memories of the sound. When it walks up to the food bag, it probably uses image and smell/taste thoughts. And so on. She talks to herself, using nonverbal thoughts mimicking her sense fields.

The discursive thoughts also mimic sense fields, combining sound with and image, and often whatever other sense fields are appropriate. For instance, I can tell myself that I want to get up early tomorrow, have a bacon and egg breakfast, and then go our and dig out the soil for the retaining wall, and all of that is a combination of sound (words spoken to myself), images, and at least one smell/taste thought or memory.

This type of self-talkalso helps with mapping, navigating and functioning in the world, and is a slight extention of the non-verbal self-talk. When I look at it, the similarities between the two are more striking than their difference.

And of course, language can also be used for communication with others, and again, in the same two forms: verbal or nonverbal. I can speak with words, or I can draw, paint, make music, dance, move or anything else that expresses whatever non-verbal sense field thoughts I want to communicate.

There is, most likely, no end to how much we can discover when we explore this, even if we do it only by noticing what is alive here now in immediate awareness.

For instance, in terms of how the nonverbal and verbal thoughts interact, I see how the nonverbal thoughts serve as a storehouse for verbal thoughts to emerge from and draw upon. There is a sound, then a thought-image of a car placed where the sound seems to emerge from, and this can fuel verbal thoughts such as a car is passing on the street, it is pretty noisy, maybe there is something wrong with the muffler. Similarly, the verbal thoughts can easily evoke non-verbal thoughts. I tell myself that I’ll have icecream with strawberries tomorrow, and right away there is an image of just that, a smell/taste thought, and also a sensation-thought.

And by exploring this, I see how all of these thoughts are really just memories. Even if they are scenarios about the future, they all draw from the past.

I also notice how thoughts, whether they are non-verbal or verbal thoughts, live their own life, on their own schedule. Verbal ones are more easily noticed so there is a tendency to attach an idea of a doer to them, and the nonverbal ones are often less noticed so appear outside of the realm of the doer. But when I explore this more, I find only the idea of a doer – organizing perception in a certain way – and no doer outside of that idea.

Thoughts happen, and that’s it. They happen, they are sometimes precedet by something that seems to trigger them, and they seem to have certain effects. But no doer is needed anywhere there.

Seeing a thought as a thought, and using the information in that thought

moe Leave a comment

As long as there is still a sense of a separate self, we can explore thoughts in different ways.

One is to recognize a thought as just a thought, through for instance labeling practice. This practice helps us differentiate perception into the different sense fields of sensation, sound, sight, smell/taste and thought, and recognize how thought filters perception. Thoughts create an overlay on what is, which creates a sense of boundaries, splits and so on which are not inherent in what is.

And whether we recognize a thought as thought or not, we use the information in that thought to help this human self navigate and function in the world. Or, more accurately, we use what appears through the overlay of thoughts to help this human self orient in the world.

Impermanence as an idea, and immediate perception

moe 2 Comments

We can explore impermanence in two ways, at least, and both are useful.

First is the exploration of impermanence in the world of thought, and also in terms of what it brings up in terms of emotions and so on. This may be in the form of high level generalization thoughts such as all is impermanent, and then also explorations within thoughts in more specific ways. I can for instance explore my day or my life, or the life of my parents, or my culture, or human civilization, or the Earth, or the Universe, and specifically see how it all changes over time, including how it all will be gone at some point in the future. This is an exploration of impermanence using thoughts of change, continuity, past and future.

To make it a little more real for me, it is helpful to bring it back to my own life. Everything I have experienced in the past is gone and will never come back in the same way. My life is limited. My days are counted, and there is a specific year, day, hour and minute that I will die, although I don’t know what it is. In a hundred year or so, I and everyone I know will be dead. In less than two hundred years, all memories of me will probably be gone, or at least not kept alive much.

In some thousand years, most of what is happening in my lifetime will be forgotten. In some hundreds of thousands of years, or maybe millions of years, humans will be gone, and everything humans have done will be gone and there will be nobody to remember it. In some millions of years, this Earth will be burnt to a crisp and all traces of human civilization will be gone (unless we went to another solar system in the meantime.) In some billions of years, this whole universe will either collapse into a big crunch, or disperse enough to die a slow heat death. Then, at the very least, will all traces of humanity be completely gone, and there will be nobody left to remember it either.

Also, what happens if I have a vivid, felt-sense of knowing that I will die in ten years? In five years? In a year? In six months? In a month? In a week? Tomorrow? Next hour? Next minute? What comes up for me then? How does it reorganize my priorities? What becomes more important? Less important? How would I live my life then?

This way of exploring impermanence can certainly have an effect, especially in terms of my priorities and what seems important in my life. Trying to impress others seems quite a bit less important, because it will all be forgotten and gone in a while anyway. Living a meaningful life, in a way meaningful for me, becomes more important.

The other way to explore impermanence is through how it shows up here and now, in immediate perception.

Since thought creates a sense of continuity, and also tells us that different experiences are the “same” as previous ones, it is helpful to differentiate the sense fields, to explore sight, sound, sensation, smell/taste and thought distinct from each other. By doing that, it becomes easier to notice how all the sense fields are in constant change. What was here a moment ago is utterly and completely gone, only a thought is left at best, a memory, but this thought is here now, brand fresh and new, even if another thought says it looks a lot like a thought from the past.

Everything arising, in each of the sense fields, is fresh and new. A thought may say that it looks similar to a memory of something that was, but that is a story of the past. What it refers to, both as here now and as something happening in the past, is already gone.

This form of exploration undermines the whole tendency to take stories as anything more than a thought, arising here now.  Attachment to stories is weakened, revealing everything arising as awakeness itself.

Exploring perceptions and overlay of thoughts

moe Leave a comment

Exploring perception and the overlay of thoughts can yield a great variety of insights, and one of the most effective ways of exploring this that I have found so far is the choiceless awareness practice, differentiating the sense fields and thoughts through labeling.

The practice helps me see how thoughts are overlaid on perception to create a sense of extent and space, continuity and time, a center and periphery, inside and outside (not in my case, but I see how it can happen), and related ones such as seeing and seen, seer and seen, a doer, a chooser, and so on.

The practice also helps me in seeing how these thoughts come in different forms.

In general, I notice how thoughts mimic the sense fields. There are image thoughts, sense thoughts, sound thoughts, smell thoughts, and taste thoughts. Thoughts create a whole imaginary sensory world, and make up its own sense field.

Then there are the discursive thoughts, the ordinary self-talk (“I wonder how the presentation tonight at Luna will be. At least the beer will be good.”)

There are also image thoughts overlaid on perception. One type of these are interpretations and suggestions for what the perceptions are, such as in image of a car put on top of a particular sound. Others are overlaid on perception and create a sense of extent, continuity, center and periphery, and so on.

This noticing is in real time, as it happens, during more formal practice sessions and also daily life.

And this differentiation of the sense fields, and particularly thought, also helps me see how gestalts are formed through the combination of sense fields.

For instance, what may appear as an emotion is just a sensation and a story about this sensation. And what appears as a separate self emerges from the combination of perceptions in a particular area of space (bodily sensations, and sights and sounds from this human self) and image thoughts of a separate self. The image thoughts of extent (space), continuity (time), center and periphery, seeing and seen, seer and seen, doer, and so on, helps flesh out this particular gestalt, making it appear very real if not see directly as this conglomerate of components.

Imagining a world

moe Leave a comment

As I continue to explore the thoughts through choiceless awareness practice (labeling the six sense fields, including thoughts) it becomes easier to directly see thoughts, and their effects, as they arise here and now. The jumble of perception and thoughts mixed in with each other is differentiated, which makes it easier to see what they are in their selves, and also how they combine to create gestalts.

It is especially interesting to explore the image thoughts, thoughts mimicking the visual field. These are overlaid on most perceptions in different ways, and serve as cues for emotions and reactions, and as a source of material for discursive thoughts.

The basic image thoughts include…

  • Space, a visual image of space overlaid on perceptions, creating a sense of space and of perceptions spread out and located in particular areas of space.
  • Continuity. Or rather, an image of time (past, future, present) with memories of perceptions overlaid onto it. Without this, no sense of continuity.
  • Body image, which serve to map bodily sensations, smell and taste, and other perceptions. Body images also serve as a guide for identifying sensations that can serve as an anchor for a sense of a separate self, and then amplify these sensations when needed through tension, so they are more prominent and even give a sense of solidity to lend to the sense of separate self. And body images also serve in locating thoughts in and around this body, even thought they arise nowhere and everywhere in immediate perception, prior to this particular filter.
  • Separate self image, and an image of a center here and periphery our there. This one is usually anchored to the body image. The body image serves as a guide for where to place the separate self image, and where the center is located in space. Space image > body image > separate self image > center/periphery image > identity images > etc.
  • Identity images, defining how this particular separate self is different from other ones. As soon as there is a sense of separation between this separate self and another, I can find an image to go with it, and see how this image is taken as real and identified with. For instance, there is physical attraction, and I see that images of me as man and the other one as woman is there, triggering the sense of attraction (along with other images saying what is attractive). And in seeing that, the solidity of it falls away (although it is still available to play with).
  • Boundary images, as permeable or more solid, creating an I and Other, and an inside and outside.
  • Metaphors we organize our world by, such as up=good, down=not so good, etc.
  • And even the archetypes in a Jungian sense…. the wise old man, the hero, and so on.

They are all image thoughts, organizing and mapping perception, serving as cues for emotions and reactions, providing material for discursive thought, and much more. And they are all directly seen as they arise, overlaid on naked perception.

Labeling practice is very helpful, which helps me see how image thoughts are placed on top of just about any perception. A sound, then an image of a crow. A sound, an image of a car on the road. A sensation, an image of the ankle. A taste, an image of the mouth and tongue, and an apple.

Simple experiments are also helpful, such as first visualizing my left hand with eyes closed, then move the hand and notice how the image of the hand moves with it, then opening my eyes and notice the perception of the hand with the thought image of the hand overlaid.

Lately, as I go about my daily life, I can especially see how identities only come from image thoughts, overlaid on pure perception.

Visual on visual

moe Leave a comment

During the most recent CSS retreat, the teacher mentioned how thoughts are most embedded in the visual field, as opposed to the other ones (sensations, taste/smell, sound).

When I explored it for myself, I found that thought seems equally “embedded”, or rather laid on top of, each of the sensory fields. In my case, and I assume this is somewhat common, there is a layer of visual thought images put on top of each sensory field: There is a sound, and a faint image of a car is put on top of it. A taste, and an image of the nose/mouth/throat area and an apple. A sensation, and an image of an ankle with a mosquito bite.

This is the same for each sensory field.

What is different, is that with the visual field, visual thought images are put on top of visual perceptions. There is visual on top of visual, which can make it more difficult to differentiate the two.

One way to differentiate, which we did during the retreat, is to close the eyes and become aware of, for instance, the visual thought image of the body, particular body parts, and how they move in anticipation of a movement of the body, or to keep track of current movements of the body. Then, we can open the eyes and get a sense of how the visual thought images are placed on top of the visual perceptions. With some practice, they become quite distinct.

Toolbox mind

moe Leave a comment

It is not uncommon to describe thoughts as a tool, one that has great practical value for our human self in the world. It is very useful for helping us navigate and function in the world, for instance by creating an overlay of thoughts on top of perceptions, including organizing the sensations within a sense of extent (space) and continuity (time).

Towards the end of Five Truths About Truth, Adyashanti takes that analogy further in a very illuminating way.

With out physical tools, we are usually pretty clear about when it is appropriate to use them, and what they can and cannot do. They are each used only as needed.

For instance, we would not ask a hammer about the meaning of life. But we do ask that question of the thinking mind, although that too is just a tool, of limited and practical value, and cannot really come up with a (satisfactory) answer to that type of question. It will innocently try to come up with an answer, and may spend a lot of time and energy doing so, but whatever answer comes up will never quite do it. It will always feel a little hollow and, ultimately, meaningless.

In the same way, as Joel at CSS pointed out a few Sundays ago, thinking mind is great for collecting information about and projecting possible outcomes of decisions, but it cannot make the decision. That comes from somewhere else, for instance the heart.

Thinking mind is an amazing tool, and it does a great job at what it is good at.

It produces an overlay of space and time on top of perception, allowing this human self to navigate in the world. It creates and continuously refine maps and databases of information. It projects memories of the past into the future creating possible scenarios of what may happen and what likely outcomes of different choices may be. It takes direct perception and experience and puts it into worlds to help differentiate and explore experience, and also communicate it to others. All of this helps our human self to orient, navigate and function in the world.

At the same time, just about all the misery of human existence comes from not being clear about how and when to use this tool. We attach to what it produces as if they were absolute truth, while they are only innocent suggestions and questions about the world. We ask it to do things it cannot do, such as coming up with answers to existential questions and make decisions for us. We identify with the thoughts it secretes and take them as “I”, while they are really just phenomena arising as anything else.

The whole process of awakening, of Ground noticing itself, is really just about how thoughts are related to. Are they taken as absolute truths and an “I”? Then, misery.

Are they seen as just thoughts, phenomena arising, inherently absent of an I? Then clarity and ease.

Images of self

moe 1 Comment

Some thought-images of self I notice through choiceless awareness…

  • Images of a particular identity at human level, used to differentiate this human self from other ones (coming up in contrast to what I see in others)
  • Body image(s), placed on top of sensations, and used to interpret sensations and guide attention
  • An image of a separate self, which…
    • Is located in the same general area of space as this body
    • Creates a sense of center here and periphery out there
    • Creates a sense of a hearer, seer, senser, doer
    • Is split into a separate self as an seen and seer, object and subject, which are located in slightly separate areas of space (for me, as seen a little ahead of the body, and as seer in or a little behind the head)
    • Is anchored in certain sensations in the body, generally in the head area
      • The exact sensations may change, especially if attention is brought to the one currently used as an anchor (another sensation may then become an anchor)
      • If an appropriate sensation is not available, or needs to be intensified, muscles tense up to create a clearer or stronger sensation
      • These sensations are “projected” to the appropriate area of space. For instance, an image of self as seer, hearer, doer may be located in the center of the head, but in the absence of sensations there, the closest sensations – for instance in the neck and throat, are used as anchor and now appear to be located in an area of space corresponding to the center of the head. Another thought is placed on it saying it is in the center of the head.

CSS retreat and thought images

moe Leave a comment

I just returned from another excellent CSS retreat, this time led by Todd who brought a wonderful fullness of heart and emotion into it along with the usual (unusual) clarity about Ground awakening that any of the teachers at CSS express.

Some of the things that came up for me using the choiceless awareness practice (labeling the six sense fields, then in this case exploring thought specifically)…

First, the new stuff…

  • There is the very familiar layer of discursive thought (self-talk), and also the layer of labeling images, labeling whatever arises in the sense-fields. For instance, something arises (bird song) and an image of a bird is placed on top of the sound. Or I close my eyes, and can still see a pale vaguely defined image of my body there, and any body part. There are sensations (swallowing) and an image of the swallowing mechanism placed on top of the sensations. A sound (lawn mover) and a vague image of a person pushing a lawn mover placed on top of the sound. These images provide a preliminary suggestion or interpretation of the perception, and serve as a fertile ground for discursive thought to arise and draw from if discursive thought arises related to that perception. These are interpretive labeling images.
  • A particular type of labeling images seem to provide cues for emotions. A perception arises, an image label suggesting what it may be is placed on top of it, and sometimes, another image label is added which provide emotion and mood cues. For me, these have color and texture as cues for what emotions and moods to trigger. (I need to explore this more to see how it plays itself out, and am also not sure if this is the same for everyone. I tend to associate words and concepts with color and texture anyway, a mild case of synesthesia, so I suspect this may be different for many others.)
  • Another type of labeling images seem to do the same for the truth content of a thought, either as really believed in or as conventional (relative) truth. For me, thoughts seen as true appear as yellow, while those less true as pale and neutral. The ones really true (believed in and taken as true) appears as bright slightly orange yellow. And those with only conventional truth as a more gentle yet still bright yellow. Weird, I know, but possibly due to synthesia.

Read More

Thoughts self-liberating, already happening

moe Leave a comment

In Buddhism, they talk about thoughts self-liberating, and by looking at it, we see that this is already happening anyway. They arise from and as the void, and vanish back into it, no matter what else is happening… whether they are recognized as awake void, or believed in and their content is taken as real and substantial.

All that is needed is to notice that this is already happening…

Thoughts self-liberate by being transient, by coming and going. Even when the content of a current thought appears to be the same as a previous one, it is a brand new fresh thought. For each one, its departure is inherent in its arrival.

And thoughts are inherently self-liberated since they are nothing other than the void itself… translucent, insubstantial. They are the void itself, mimicking the sensory fields without input through the senses. They are nothing more real than that.

Both are pretty easy to notice, just by bringing attention to the thoughts themselves, to thoughts as thoughts, instead of to their particular content (and having the attention absorbed into their content).

When attention go to their content, and the content is taken as real, a whole world is created and this is what creates a sense of a prison (of an I trapped inside of a world where suffering is inherent) and an urge to be liberated from this.

Recognizing thoughts as thoughts is one way to find that liberation.

And what is liberated is really the thoughts themselves… they are liberated from being believed in, from being identified with, taken as real and substantial. Through that, the final “prison” of taking the idea of a separate self as true can also, eventually, fall away.

Exploring labeling-images

moe Leave a comment

Just before falling asleep, and after waking up, I have take some time to explore labeling-images. It is an interesting phenomenon, although maybe not exactly earth shattering.

The job of the mind is to produce thoughts, and one category of thoughts are these labels that take the form of images.

Labels of sounds are usually quite clear cut. There is a sound, and then an image of an appropriate airplane surfaces. Another sound, and an image of a section of road and a car. Another sound, and the image of a person (as a shadowy outline) walking on gravel. The image labels surface with a suggestion of what the sound most likely represent, and there is an appropriate response (which usually is no response) to the image (not the sound itself). Most of the time the image surfaces outside of conscious attention. It is there, has effects, but is not necessarily noticed itself.

Where the labels of sounds typically represent the most likely physical source of the sound, labels of sensations are a little more complex.

Read More

Nature of thoughts

moe Leave a comment

I keep exploring the nature of thoughts, seeing thoughts as thoughts, their insubstantial and fleeting nature, how they mimic the five sensory fields (sight, sound, smell, taste, sensations), and how – when attention goes into their content and, crucially, take them as real – a whole world is created. A world that, since it is taken as real, appears as real, and create consequences in our experiences as if it was real.

As usual, thoughts can be explored from their emptiness and form sides.

I can see thoughts as thoughts, in their insubstantial and fleeting nature and mimicking sensory fields. And I can investigate the content of these thoughts, revealing that they have only a relative and limited truth. In both cases, we see them more as they are, and the tendency to take them as real weakens.

Thoughts mirroring sensory world, and levels

moe Leave a comment

I also had an opportunity to explore thoughts more… just noticing thoughts as thoughts, and leave it at that, without fueling them, without getting absorbed into their content.

And seeing all the many forms and levels of thoughts…

Seeing how thoughts mirror and mimic a sensory world... taking the form of each of the sense fields, such as sounds, smells, tastes, sensations, and are really nothing beyond that. Yet, when attention goes to their content, and there is a fascination with the thoughts, they create a whole world without or independent of sensory input.

And also, the levels of thoughts.

There are the thoughts which we are most familiar with… clear, well defined, explicit

Then, the ones which are more subtle and transparent. For instance, there is a sound, and then a subtle image of a plane hovers for a while. Or a sound, and then a subtle image of a person walking on gravel. This normally happens outside of where attention goes, but is clear when attention is brought to it. It is the mind labeling experience, usually slightly outside of attention.

Then the level of thoughts where they are more like bubbles forming but not quite bursting. They are like the beginnings of burps that don’t go anywhere. A murmuring outside of what can be clearly resolved, even when attention is brought to it (this may change as it is explored further).

And then a level of thoughts and stories that form our most unquestioned, and unnoticed, beliefs. The belief in continuity, in space and time, in a separate self, and so on.

These beliefs can be mirrored at a more everyday thought level and explored there, and a great deal of valuable insights can come from it. But that, in itself, does not necessarily touch the deeper layer of stories.

As Fred, one of the teachers at the CSS retreat, said: our conscious thinking cannot create or prevent awakening. It has nothing to do with it.

There is a glimpse of this level when I do concentration/stabilization practice (for instance bringing attention to the breath). When an intention is added to it, there is sometimes a shift into a place “below” even many of the most basic stories, for instance that of continuity.

If music is playing it “falls into its own parts” and there is no sense of any continuity. There is a clear seeing of continuity of space and time as being created by a story of continuity. A story that pieces is all together creating the appearance of continuity.

(That is what Kant said too, but it is quite different – and startling at first – to directly, clearly, nakedly, see it.)

I assume this is the level where the story of I, as Joel calls it, sits as well. It is the realm of of most basic stories, the ones believed in at a level below what we usually take as beliefs. The ones our rational mind and conscious thinking cannot even touch. Our conscious thinking cannot create or prevent awakening. It has nothing to do with it.

The story of a separate self has to be released at that deep level… below the thoughts as clear and explicit, as subtle images, as little burps… 

Dream: books being sold off

moe Leave a comment

I am spending a good deal of time buying book treasures from used book stores, mostly on Buddhist and art subjects. I also belong to a Buddhist group and discover, to my horror, that they are selling these books to the public at give-away prices. I had intended only some books to be sold on, and the rest to be kept. Some of the books are rare finds, and may not even be appreciated by those buying them. Even as I try to explain the situation to the people selling them, more are sold.

This dream had a nightmarish quality… spending all that time identifying and buying book treasures, and then having them all sold off to the general public for next to nothing…!

The dream parallels two things in my life:

First, the giving away of my insights and skills freely, without asking for anything in return (including having volunteered a large number of hours for NWEI, and giving away a large number of Breema sessions for free).

The other, more specific to this retreat, a surrendering of conceptualized insights… seeing them for what they are, only thoughts. Only images and sounds created by the mind, arising and dissolving from and into nothingness.

Surrendering is inherent in the process of just seeing thoughts as thoughts, arising from and dissolving into nothingness.

Resistance to Ground, etc.

moe Leave a comment

Just a quick summary of what I am exploring these days, as it happens in immediate awareness. What came out below is not very well organized…

  • The Ground, here now, is the field of awakeness, of awake emptiness and whatever arises. It is inherently free from any center and any separate self. It is just one field, beyond and embracing seeing and seen, awareness and its content, this human self and the wider world of form.
  • This Ground is is what is here now, for each of us, only absent of a sense of I and Other. Imagine the content of your awareness, and the awareness itself, as it is, only with a sense of I and Other subtracted from it.
  • When there is resistance to Ground as this field, there is an appearance of I and Other.
  • This happens when there is a belief in a story, when thoughts are taken as anything more than innocent questions, when they are seen as absolutely true.
  • A story becomes a belief when another story is added to it, saying it is true.
  • A story becomes a belief, also when it combines with a sensation. Sensation+story=belief.
  • When a sensation is combined with a story, it gives a sense of a center located at a particular place in space, specifically at the sensation, somewhere within the physical boundary of this human self.
  • This center also allows for a split of space, and a sense of I here and Other out there.
  • This split allows for placing one end of any polarity here, somewhere in this physical body, and the other end somewhere out there in the wider world.
  • This placing of ends of a polarity here and out there, is also how projections work. If, according to how I place a polarity (which in turn is decided by beliefs and identities), one end of a polarity should be out there, then when it arises, it is interpreted as out there. For instance, if I believe I shouldn’t be angry, and have an identity as someone who is not angry, then when anger arises, I have now choice but to filter it so it appears out there in the wider world, placed on appropriate targets (the ones I place it on may indeed experience and act from anger, which only makes them better projection objects).
  • Any belief automatically creates resistance… to the truths in its reversals, and what doesn’t fit the identity that goes with it.
  • The split of space allows for resistance to what is. It filters the appearance of what is allowed and not allowed into different locations of space… what is allowed appears to be in the region where there is a sense of I, and what is not allowed appears as if in another region of space. (What is allowed/not allowed is determined by beliefs.)
  • The sensation a story is combined with serves as a base for a split of space into I and Other (providing a fixed point in space to define the boundary), and also for resistance to parts of what is arising.
  • The sense of density, substance and reality of a sensation provides a sense of the same, of density, substance and reality, to the story it is associated with.
  • If a belief needs to be amplified, it can be amplified in two ways. One is to amplify the sensation it is placed on, which in turn allows for a stronger belief, a sense of more substance to the belief, and a stronger sense of split between I here and Other out there. Another is to engage in and develop supporting beliefs.
  • If a story needs to be combined with a sensation (to create a belief and a split in space), and an appropriate sensation is not available, muscles tense up to create appropriate sensations.
  • A belief also amplifies tension, because it creates a sense of I and Other, and something to protect (a truth or an identity), which in turn creates mental and physical tension.
  • Any belief creates a split in space, of something that is true here and false somewhere else, so also a sense of I and Other.

The function of thoughts

moe Leave a comment

Some of the functions of thoughts…

  • They help our human self explore, and orient and navigate in the world (they split up the seamless whole so we can explore segments of any shape and size, how they relate to each other, and the larger whole they are aspects of)
  • They help our human self communicate, with itself and others, here and now (although there is always some lag time) and between past, present and future
  • When believed in, they create a sense of a separate self, and I with and other, which is essential for lila (God playing hide-and-seek with itself)

Whether believed in or not, they help our human self explore, orient and navigate within the world of form. And when believed in, when a story is added to the stories saying they are true, they create a sense of a separate self, and the richness of the human drama.

The human self not trusting it can function well without being identified with

moe Leave a comment

When the Ground of emptiness awakens to itself, it can be very odd for our human self. It is used to being identified with, and no it is suddenly not identified with anymore.

It realizes that it is just happening, just as everything else is just happening.

There are still sights, sounds, smells, tastes, sensations, thoughts, choices, actions, relationships and everything else, but it is just happening on its own. It is all living its own life. There is lots of doing, but no doer anywhere. There is just a field of what is happening… this room, the sound of the dehumidifier, the cat walking up to connect, the chill on the fingers, tapping of the keys, thoughts arising reflected in words on the screen, getting up to get a glass of water… one field, with no part being more or less identified than anything else.

It can be disconcerting for the human self at first. Will it get by without being identified with? Isn’t being identified with, taken as an I, necessary for it to function in the world?

The rug is pulled out from under its feet, the bottom fell out, it is suspended in thin air…

But if it stays with this, it sees that not only can the human self function well without being identified with, it can even function better in relative terms. There is an absence of drama, so just clarity and simplicity… even the most engaged activities happens within a context of utter clarity and simplicity.

In a way, it is a matter of trust. Of the human self trusting it can function OK without being taken as a separate I. Sometimes, emptiness awakens to itself so clearly that all questions are blown away and the awakening is stable. Other times, and maybe more commonly, emptiness awakens to itself many times, each time followed by the human self not quite trusting the shift and going back into safe and familiar ground, and each time becoming a little more familiar with living without being identified with. Each time trusting a little more, until the shift happens in a more stable way.

There never was a separate self in the first place… only awakeness, emptiness and whatever is happening in form… the only difference is that now, this awake emptiness notices itself… and when it does, any exclusive identification with any part of this field goes out the window.

It is seen as simply a belief in the idea of a separate self, as placing a sense of I within a segment of this field and making the rest into Other. Emptiness awakening to itself cleans it all out.

Sensations as anchor

moe Leave a comment

I keep coming back to this throughout the day, and especially as I fall asleep in the evening… The exploration of the sense of a separate self placed on sensations, and combined with certain thoughts.

It can sound abstract when I try to put it into words, but it is very alive in immediate experience.

I see how there is a vast of rich landscape of combinations happening… shifting anchor from one sensation to another, and attaching thoughts and stories to each one… richly, fluidly.

It is amazing to see how a whole world is created in this way, or rather a rich and changing interpretation of this world.

Some sensations, typically in the throat and calf areas, are used as anchor for stories that trigger stress and a sense of resistance. Other sensations, especially in the nostril area, are used as anchor for a sense of an atmosphere (often a sweet one.) And there is also more stable background stream of a sense of a separate self, placed on sensations in the center of the upper throat/lower head area.

It even seems that if there isn’t an appropriate sensation ready as a requested anchor, then it is made through muscle contractions. Tension in certain muscles create particular sensations, used as anchor for certain stories or even a sense of a particular atmosphere.

It is strange to observe, but also clear… all happening in an differentiated way, right here, within the wide open space of awake emptiness and form.

Thoughts reflecting the past II (effects)

moe Leave a comment

What are the effects of noticing, through careful examination, that our thoughts always reflect the past?

Well, when it is seen, over and over, in our own life, and is felt in our bones, it allows relative truths to be seen as relative truths, and the release that follows.

Holding our stories more lightly

It is another nudge in the direction of holding any thoughts, ideas, stories, assumptions and shoulds a little more lightly. Seeing that, yes, they are only relative truths at best. Only questions about the world.

And it is a reminder to look a little closer when something appears to myself as an absolute truth or a statement. Maybe it is really just a relative truth and a question.

This goes for the grand scale theories and views, such as our general world view, religion, political faith, and so on, and maybe especially for the smaller and apparently more innocent ones in my daily life such as she should do her dishes, people shouldn’t lie, I should have more money, I shouldn’t be sick, and life should be fair.

The shift

When these are taken as absolute truths and statements, they bring stress because life does not conform (my individual will is at odds with life’s will.) When they are examined, and revealed as just relative truths and innocent questions, there is a sense of release, spaciousness, ease and simplicity.

Reactivity gives way to receptivity. Contraction to spaciousness. Struggle to ease. Confusion to clarity. Compulsiveness or paralysis to natural engagement. A sense of separation to intimacy. Alienation to a sense of belonging. Defending against any view, to finding the truth in it.

Thoughts reflecting the past

moe Leave a comment

Many teachers (and teachings) talk about how thoughts reflect the past, and only reflect the past.

Is it true? When I heard this again as a quote from Byron Katie, there wasn’t an immediate and whole-hearted recognition, so I decided to explore it again for myself. It is true in my own experience?

Thoughts arising here and now, with content about past, present and future

Thoughts, as anything else, arise here and now. But their content appear, on the surface, to be about the past, present and future.

Thoughts about the present, about what that just left

When I look at thoughts about the present, I see that they always reflect what has already gone. They cannot keep up with the continuous stream of content, they are always a little slow, always about what just left.

Thoughts about the future, reflecting the past

Thoughts about the future are maybe a little different, but even here, they actually reflect the past. They are projections into the future, into what may be, based on experiences from the past. I hit my toe on the leg of the table a while ago, and it hurt, so I assume it will hurt if I do it again. I enjoyed a vacation up in the mountains last year, so assume I will enjoy it again. I resolved a stressful issue last night by doing inquiry into it, so assume inquiry may work again on future stressful situations.

These are all reasonable assumptions, and are very helpful in daily life. They have a clear practical value in our everyday human life, and without them we probably wouldn’t last very long.

But as helpful as they are, these thoughts are still reflecting the past, taking past experiences and lessons from past experiences and projecting them into an imagined future.

Thoughts about the past, present and future, all reflecting the past

So thoughts about the past are obviously reflecting the past, thoughts about the present are really about what just left, and thoughts about the future reflect past experiences – projected into the future.

And the interpretation of any of this also, obviously, reflects the past. Past experiences, and my stories about them, color how I interpret anything in the past, present or future.

Humbling realization

So, yes, when I look at my own thoughts, I see over and over that they not only reflect the past, but 100% reflect the past.

It is a humbling realization.

More about the effects of realizing this in the following post(s).

Freshness of experience and expression

moe Leave a comment

As beliefs in ideas fade, go into the background or fall away, there is a more immediate experience of what is arising. Where thoughts would say I have seen this before, there is the immediate experience of whatever arises as always fresh, new, different.

In the same way, as beliefs fall away our words take on a fresh quality. They come out as fresh, new, and different, whether they appear to have been spoken before or not.

Freshness of experience

Thoughts arise with a question: is this similar to what has been experienced or said before? And then maybe, yes, it seems similar.

And if this thought is believed in, another set of thoughts may come up: yes, it is the same. I have seen or heard this before. Things should be new, yet this is the same old. How boring.

Thoughts can also be seen for what they are: as innocent questions, even when they appear as statements. They can provide useful and practical information in a conventional sense, as a help for orienting and functioning in the world. Yes, when they are not believed in, they remain as just guidelines of temporary and practical use only. And they too arise as always unique, fresh, different, along with anything else arising here now.

Freshness of expression

And the freshness of expression comes in two ways:

One is from the immediacy and freshness of experience, which gives the expression of it a sense of freshness as well.

The other is in seeing ideas as merely ideas, which gives a freedom in experimenting with how to express immediate realization and experience in different ways, relying less on what we have heard, read or said before.

The makeup of our human self probably plays a role here as well.

If it is happy with tradition and what is already laid down, it may use that as a framework for expression. There are many examples here of following collective or one’s individual traditions.

If it has more of an adventurous and newness seeking tendency, it may explore new ways of expressing perennial insights, as Adyashanti and Byron Katie do. Or it may come up with something that combines these perennial insights with temporary insights and views in a fresh way, as Ken Wilber does in his aqal framework and Genpo Roshi with the Big Mind process.

And maybe most importantly, it may seek to grow, mature and develop so the ways the insights come out do the same. So there is a freshness in how it comes out, also in the context of its own history.

How to deal with thoughts?

moe Leave a comment

Some of the ways we relate to thoughts…

Believing in or not

In general, we can believe in them or not.

As long as there is a belief in any thought, there is a belief in the basic thought of “I” and a corresponding identity. We believe in some thoughts and not others, and with different degrees of attachment.

This creates a sense of I and other, an identity that defines who I am and am not, a discrepancy between beliefs and the inner and outer world as it arises, and a sense of struggle and drama.

When there is realized selflessness, beliefs in thoughts fall away as well. Or we can say that when the belief in “I” as a segment of what is falls away, so does beliefs in other thoughts as well. Without a sense of I, no attachment to thoughts.

(I have to say that in some cases of alleged realized selflessness, it certainly appears – when looking at words and actions – that there is still a belief in certain thoughts. What the human self does seems remarkably limited and frozen if all beliefs indeed had dropped away.)

Awakening to thoughts as related to stress

We can awaken, in different ways, to thoughts as related to stress.

We notice that being absorbed in thoughts, or attaching to thoughts, or trying to push thoughts away, brings disassociation or stress.

And although this is true for all thoughts (at least all the ones I have explored so far), it may appear as if it is true for only some of them.

And although it is the belief in thoughts that brings stress, it may appear as if thoughts themselves are a problem.

:: See thoughts themselves as the source

If we see thoughts themselves as a problem, we set ourselves up for failure.

We may engage in strategies to pacify or remove thoughts, such as drugs, sleep, entertainment or other forms of distractions. If we are a little more sophisticated, we may engage in practices that manipulate attention (visualizations, “good thoughts”). Although these strategies may give short term relief, it is ultimately a recipe for failure as thoughts come and go on their own and live their own life.

:: See beliefs as the source

We can recognize beliefs as the source, and inquire into the beliefs – allowing the attachment to the thought to erode and eventually fall away.

:: See the sense of I as the source

We can recognize the belief in the thought “I” as the source, as that which all other beliefs hinges on.

So we may engage in practices that temporarily shift attention away from the sense of I, giving a taste of how it is to be free from the story of I and everything that comes with it. These practices include, again, drugs, sex and entertainment. And also being in nature, prayer, meditation, and Breema.

We can inquire into any stressful belief that comes up, allowing one thread of the tapestry of beliefs to unravel at a time, until it all falls away taking the belief in the idea of “I” with it.

Or we can go directly for the belief in the idea of I through other forms of inquiry, mainly various forms of Atma Vichara such as the Big Mind process, labeling, and noticing the seen and the seeing as inherently absent of I. (And allowing what is seen to seep through our whole being, allowing it all to reorganize around it, be affected by it.)

Relating to Thoughts

moe Leave a comment

Nothing new here, but still something that comes up for me…

As long as we believe in thoughts – or more precisely in abstractions in any form, such as images, memories, models, theories, thoughts and so on – we will experience stress. The world will show up in a way that does not conform with our beliefs in particular abstractions about it, and the discrepancy creates discomfort, uneasiness, and suffering. Our conscious view is out of alignment with what is, and this naturally creates suffering.

And as long as we believe in thoughts, as long as they have a charge for us, we will also experience what we perceive as unwanted thoughts. Thoughts appear because that is their job. They come and go as clouds. And if we believe some of them should not, then they appear as unwanted. We interpret them as intruding, and some of them may even be labeled negative, destructive, pathological and so on.

We use many ways of trying to deal with these thoughts, including developing a strong focus (temporarily pushing them aside), shifting attention (to the breath, the body and so on), therapy, affirmations (trying to replace them with other, more “positive”, thoughts), and so on. But none of these will really work as long as we still believe in the original thoughts. For as long as they have a charge for us, they will show up and want our attention. They will come back wanting resolution. Wanting to be resolved. Wanting to be seen through.

These thoughts are completely innocent. It is only our belief in them, or in our stories about them, that gives them any charge. We attach to them because they appear real, significant, substantial, powerful, accurate and/or true.

And this belief can only hold as long as it is not thoroughly investigated. It is only the unexamined beliefs which stay beliefs and maintain their charge.

When we investigate the beliefs, through the four questions and the turnaround, and explore more in detail what is really true for us in our immediate experience, the belief naturally erodes and falls away. It is seen through. The thought loses its charge. It loses its apparent grip on us. It loses its apparent reality, substance, power, accuracy, significance and truth.

The thoughts are now revealed as what they are – completely innocent questions about the world. And as they have no charge anymore, they come and go as clouds – and with as much (or rather little) impact as clouds passing through the sky. They no longer appear intrusive. No thoughts are seen as positive or negative. No thoughts are any longer pathological. They just are.

In releasing these beliefs, we also uncover the inherent nature of mind – is clarity, wisdom, compassion, love, and effortless effectiveness in functioning in the world. These qualities are what we are, inherently, each one of us, and they are only temporarily covered up by beliefs in abstractions and the consequences coming from that. It never goes away, no matter what the surface phenomena may look like in the present.

Ultimately, we end up seeing through the belief in the idea of I, and even that one falls away, revealing the selfless nature of what is. We discover that we are not exclusively our human self or awareness, but what is – beyond and including any and all polarities. There is only the suchness. Only God. It is all the play of God, and it is all good.

It is good, far beyond even the most appealing and attractive images and hopes painted by any belief.

Thoughts as Innocent Questions

moe Leave a comment

When thoughts are believed in, they seem substantial, real, important, meaningful, and so on.

When thoughts are released from beliefs, they are revealed as innocent questions – inquiries into an aspect of the world.

So there may be the thought I am a failure.

If I believe that thought, it seems substantial and meaningful, and it will most likely make me depressed – and cause a range of other responses and reactions in me as well.

If I don’t believe that thought, it just becomes an innocent invitation to inquiry. Am I a failure? Well, it obviously depends on how failure is defined, and it can easily be defined in many different ways. How does my life appear when I examine it filtered through some of these definitions? That can be a quite interesting exploration, allowing for useful and helpful insights.

This insight is just one of the many Byron Katie mentions. And it is one that seems to arise naturally from engaging in her inquiry process over time, at least it does for me. As with any insight, it is temporary and arising during one phase of the exploration process. Next time I look, it may well appear differently. Another layer may have been shed, and something else arises.

Precision

moe Leave a comment

When I listen to or read various teachings, there is often an impulse coming up around precision.

So there is an impulse of precision coming up. If I think it is for someone else, it takes the form of judgment. If I realize it is really for me, it is an invaluable pointer towards maturing a little further.

Thoughts as problems?

If someone talks as if thoughts themselves ever are a problem, there is a discrepancy with my experience of thoughts as never a problem – only beliefs in them are. This discrepancy can takes the form of wanting more precision.

And if I put it on him, it becomes “he should be more precise” and is associated with blame, judgment, sense of separation and so on. If I see that the impulse is for me, I take it as an invitation and opportunity to differentiate for myself.

I can see that for me, only beliefs appear as a problem, never thoughts themselves – they are innocent. And it also invites me to inquiry into and explore this further. What is really true for me in the present? How is it true for me in the present?

Attachments

The same is the case for talks about attachment. Sometimes, it is presented as if we can ever be attached to situations or things. That does not seem true in my experience.

I find that I can only be attached to stories and beliefs, and this may – and usually does – take the appearance of attachment to situations, people, things and so on. But it is only an appearance. I can only find attachments to stories and thoughts…

Again, it is an invitation to explore what is true for me, and what is true for me right now – which may, and usually is, different from what I expect.

Sharing findings

My experiences and findings are obviously for me, meant for me, and if they can help others inquire and explore for themselves that is great as well.

They may find something entirely different, which in turn can stimulate me to inquire a little further and more honestly.

Thoughts

moe Leave a comment

The Byron Katie inquiry process may appear – before we engage in it – to concern itself with thoughts.

In reality, it seems to help us clear up our relationship with Existence, on all levels.

The “thoughts” we work with – in verbal/written form – are indications of much deeper orientations and relationships with Existence. And these orientations runs through all levels of our being, including physical, energetic, emotional, cognitive and consciousness/awareness.

When there is suffering and/or contraction, it indicates an area where our deeper orientation is not aligned with what is – with Existence. And through inquiry, we can clear up this confusion.

Splits

moe Leave a comment

Excistence is beyond and embracing all dualities.

When awareness identifies with its content and functions in a more dualistic way, there are splits. And these splits take the form of projections which appear in different ways.

Thoughts
In terms of thoughts, we tend to believe in one set of thoughts (mutually consistent or not) and ignore or dismiss their opposites. We are stuck in a particular and limited view of Existence, and this brings suffering whenever Existence behaves in a way that does not correspond to the view.

One way of working with this is to take any thought (statement), turn it around in any way possible (to ourselves, others, its opposite), and find how each of these new statements are as true as the original. In this way, we loosen up attachment to one limited view and open up for a more comprehensive, inclusive and fluid relationship to the different views.

It may also allow us to let go of beliefs (attachments to thoughts) altogether, and allow awareness to become aware of itself as distinct from its content.

Characteristics
Related to this, we tend to see certain characteristics in the inner world (in ourselves), and their opposites in the outer world (in others). This split allows us to experience a strong difference between the outer and inner world. It defines our self-image, which in turn defines what we allow ourselves to experience in the inner world and to express in our behavior. This self-image is formed through culture, subcultures and personal experiences, and is always in flux as everything else.

One of the consequences of this split, is that we relate to characteristics in ourselves and others with attraction and aversion. These function as a glue that binds our attention to whatever we are not yet completely familiar and comfortable with in ourselves, so we have the opportunity to become more familiar and comfortable with it.

When desired characteristics are seen in ourselves, we experience satisfaction, joy, gratitude, self-confidence, arrogance. When undesired characteristics are seen in ourselves, we experience sadness, guilt, depression, blame, anger, frustration. When desired characteristics are seen in others, we experience attraction, love, envy, greed. When undesired characteristics are seen in others, we experience criticism, righteousness, anger, hatred.

Also here, a way to work with this is to turn it around. Whenever I see a characteristic in the outer world (a person, landscape, dream, story, fairy tale), independent on whether I relate to it with attraction, aversion or indifference, I can explore how this characteristic is also there in the inner world, in myself. Is it there as only a potential, or more alive and unfolded? How does it express itself in my everyday life? How do I relate to it? From where did I learn this way of relating to it? What consequences does this way of relating to it have in my everyday life? How would my everyday life be different if I was more familiar with this characteristic in myself? How would my self-image change?

As we see in ourselves what we see in others, we become more familiar and comfortable with these characteristics, and form a more inclusive and fluid self-image. We open up for more awareness in how to relate to these characteristics in ourselves and others, and for genuine empathy with ourselves and others. We know from ourselves what we see in them. We see ourselves and others as universally human, as life manifesting.