Saturday, September 5, 2015

Wake Up! There are sharks in the Think Tank


One of the most frustrating and freeing inquiries I've ever come across is the one spawned from this doodle.

Here.  Let's think about that.

The first reason for the frustration is exactly what the doodle notes.  The truth of things is that I just cannot ever predict what the next thought will be.  This is a problem because in the middle of inquiry, a thought about what happened at work last Monday will just pop.  There is absolutely no control over this no matter how hard "I" try.  This invading thought may be followed by one involving a plan for dinner, or maybe even an entirely ridiculous and imaginary scene I happen to enjoy because it involves Chris Cornell. 

Yeah.  You really don't want to think about that.

The second reason for my vexation is the impossible situation I find myself trying to unravel, which is that inquiry itself IS thoughtSo here is where I become bound within the immovable condition of thought looking at thought to figure out thought. And as the doodle points out, there's absolutely no control over how the inquiry is going to go.  Given this scenario, exactly HOW am I ever going to be able to tell which thought is more true, accurate, or one which is going to be believed?  Newsflash:  Belief is a thought!

See, there's no point in thinking about that either.

Someone please tell me how this endeavor is going to go anywhere else but to see that it's entirely futile to try to figure it out, and in this futility lies the freedom.

If the answers (thought) found in inquiry are just more thought, then what does that mean about everyday thinking?  Unpredictable scary thoughts don't actually carry any more real merit than the pleasant ones, except through more thought.  Because of this crazymaking circlejerk, the answers found in inquiry don't really amount to anything but more of the same!

Are you dizzy, dear reader, because my head is spinning.  That's when it hits me like an anvil:  the inquiry itself is creating the self, the me, the one who asks, the one whom it asks, and the only one who EVER answers. 



21 comments:

  1. Good points.Thank you
    Could you please elaborate more about the stories. Are all thoughts just stories, or lies? When do the stories begin, for example there are thoughts about flowers about its colours, size, smell etc, so is it stories not to be believed or truth?
    Thank you

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Tim,

      Glad to elaborate. Thoughts are definitely stories from what I can see and the reason I say this is because they aren't things in and of themselves. Instead, they *refer* to things. We often interchange the two, but careful inquiry shows that thoughts aren't real in and of themselves. They are the true definition of imagination.

      Does that make more sense? So, it's not necessary to believe in the thoughts themselves, but you can still interact with the input from the other senses.

      Let me know if that helps.

      Delma

      Delete
  2. Yeas I see, that thoughts in themselves aren't real, they refer to things, but, what do you mean, they are the true definition of imagination? Isn't thoughts refer to the real things? I'm having a hard time with the meaning of the thoughts, it's sooou sticky))
    I apologise for any mistakes, English isn't my first language

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What I mean is that if you define imagination as something that exists only in the mind, then thought is imagination.

      Here' an example:

      Right now I'm thinking of a blue and glittering unicorn standing in my living room. The thought itself is a real thought, but the content is purely imaginary.

      :)

      Delete
  3. Seems my last messagexact get lost, so I am just resending it with the main example: let's take the book, it has plenty of different words, but they have connection with each other, so alltogether they are making perfect sense. And if we change that words with each other, what we'll get then is that every single word still has it's meaning, but altogether it would sound ridiculous. So in the first case there is something, that makes words connected with each thus making story, isn't it?
    Do you see my point, hope you"ll understand something

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not sure I understand. Yes, each word has meaning, and putting them together give them even more meaning. But all meaning is created in the mind. It's imagined. However, we live in a society which has agreed upon some imaginary things... like the definition of words, or labels for things. It's still imaginary, though.

      The thing about thought is that it has such a hold. Scary or worrisome thoughts are believed to be real. But they're not. They are inert and have absolutely zero power. It's astonishing, though, how much we believe that they do!

      Delete
  4. Yes, you got it.

    If I get it right, basically, the thoughts not even pointers, right? They point to nothing in reality, but, how not to believe some worring thoughts about the future, isn't then one can end up being homeless without any income?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thoughts can refer to things in reality, but they are not the final authority on the reality of life. Worrying thoughts are not stronger, better, or more real than any other thought.

      Test this. Think a worrying thought. Then think a good one. Do this while looking out at the view. Does the view change as the thought changes? Does life depend upon thought at all or does it work on its own, without regard for thoughts? :)

      Delete
  5. Hhmmm...A thought refers to reality only because we think/believe it, I would say...or, how a thought "table" refers to the real thing? I dont see any connections between thought and real thing, yes, when saying "the table" the body somehow responds, the image arises, but is it supposed to be that connection? I would say no. Would you hear " the table" in another language, you don't understand, it would sound meaningless, then, so it's all about the mind, as you have said: we have agreed upon some imaginary things,...or maybe you mean different by saying, that thoughts can refer to things?

    Tested))
    Ok, the view( you mean "seeing" right?) doesnt change, but action does. By tthinking about the future, lets say next month, I deside, what to do next and when time comes the actons follow, yep, no "I" who desides, but still, thoughts come, desiding happens then actions follow, so how is it, that thoughts dont have any power?

    ReplyDelete
  6. The thoughts don't do the action, the body does. The thoughts appear first, sure, but they are random and not all thoughts are acted upon. Why not? Because in and of themselves, they can't cause action. Circumstances cause action. :)

    ReplyDelete
  7. Wel, yes, circumstances, as saying goes: If you want to make God laugh, tell him about your plans))
    But...

    You say - thought cant cause actions, ok, example: you are planing for holiday, what happens in a month, you need to buy this and that , make some preparations and so on, so you making a list of thing " to do". Then, next week you do everything by that list. What I see here is that firstly there was thinking, planing, what produced latter actions. You did everything by your list, how it was planned, it wasnt spontaneous. So, how is it, that thought dont have any power, or innocent, why then, the body behaved accordingly with the list, I would say the thoughts are very guilty?))
    What am I missing here?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Tim!

      Well, what's happening is that the actions are being attributed to the thought as a cause/effect relationship. That's how we traditionally understand this relationship but is it the only one?

      What if the thought popped up as part of the process of taking a trip? In other words, if the trip is going to happen, then some thinking needs to occur in order to get the things on the list. But what decides to make the list? What decides to take the trip? From where does the decision come? From where does the thought come?

      All of these things are spontaneous and natural, but we attribute cause and effect. The thoughts still have absolutely no power to go out and get the things on the list. It just happens because the *need* arises. Other thoughts are completely dismissed because the need doesn't arise. In this way, "we" don't act on thoughts themselves. We just take action on some thoughts, and can't predict which those will be.

      Delete
  8. Hi Delma,

    So, the thought is responsible for the actions as the rain is responsible for the wet leafs on the trees after raining is that exactly, what you are saying?

    Its like a chain, right, the impulse, the need, the desire arises, then thought and next actions, all have their own functioning, or ...hmm, dont you want to say, that it possible to function without thinking?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When you wake up in the morning, do you think about each step of your morning routine or does it just happen? ;)

      Delete
  9. Yes , the whole myriad of functions are happening every second in the body without us even knowing about it,...., sorry, I wasn't clear with my last question. I mean the case when thoughts do produce actions, as I mentioned in example with raining, so the thought dont have power, as it doesn't have the willpower, however it has functions, right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do thoughts actually *produce* actions, or are they just thought to produce actions?

      Delete
  10. Some actions definitely depend on thoughts. How can you deny that? Firstly think something to do, that do it, simple as that. You don't need to think or imagine, if thoughts do produce actions, it just is. ))
    Like just suddenly thought about the tea appears, then desire arises and you go to make a tea.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Actions seem to depend upon thoughts, but the question I'm looking at is whether thoughts *produce* anything at all. In and of themselves. That's what I see when I say they have no power. They're just thoughts.

    ReplyDelete
  12. From what I see, thoughts are necessary for some actions to happen. They just don't produce actions by will. It happens while there's belief in content of the thoughts. Actions would not happen without it.
    Thank you

    ReplyDelete
  13. I think we're mixing a couple of things. While I agree that thoughts appear to be necessary before things happen, what I'm saying is that thoughts themselves do not produce actions *in and of themselves. I mean literally. Very literally. In that way, they actually don't have power.

    To believe that they hold power, to me, is just another thought. And the idea of waking up is to wake up to thinking and believing. See it for what it is, and see that ultimately, thought cannot harm. Actions harm (or help). But seeing the separation between the two leads to a lightness and freedom, in my experience.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Some things are quite tricky to explain.
    Definitely on their own thoughts can't make something to happen. I see your point.

    ReplyDelete