Seeking I guess, always seeking.

Welcome to the main forum. When you are ready to start a conversation, register and once your application is processed a guide will come to talk to you.
This is one-on-one style forum, one thread per green member.
User avatar
JonathanR
Posts: 4292
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 10:14 pm

Re: Seeking I guess, always seeking.

Postby JonathanR » Tue Dec 17, 2019 12:09 am

Thank you Liam.

Jon

User avatar
Oneironaut
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2019 4:50 pm

Re: Seeking I guess, always seeking.

Postby Oneironaut » Tue Dec 17, 2019 1:37 pm

Hi there,
Are thoughts always ABOUT something, some idea of other, commentary or narration of events?
It seems so, they are frequently asserting ideas about stuff. As if they are always trying to makes sense of things, identify and solve problems. Sometimes I'm running over what I would say to someone in an hypothetical conversation, it's always quite defensive, as if I'm trying to confirm or make sense of my position in a situation. That how actions and feelings are in need of adequate explanation and there's thought explaining stuff to me. (or myself or itself, I couldn't say which term would be most accurate)

I can't think of examples where thought is not about something.
Is it possible to create a thought. Try 'thinking' a thought.
This is a weird experiment to do, when I try to create thought, there is a sense of responsibility, an "I did that" sense. However there was already thought before the "attempt" so it almost feels like the claim "I did that" is actually being placed on the thought after the fact.

There's a Christmas tree where I'm sat, so I looked at it and thought "I'll make a thought about that tree". So I do and looking at the tree I hear, in that familiar me voice "that's a nice tree". Thing is, I didn't know I was going to think that till I heard the thought. I didn't think to myself "im going to specially think the thought "that's a nice tree"" then looked at the tree and repeated the thought. Even if I did do that, how would I have created the original planning thoughts. As they are thoughts themselves.

Sometimes attempting to think a thought just leaves me loudly thinking "THOUGHT" as if I don't know what else to think, of course how would I, I haven't thought it about it yet.
Is it possible to prevent thoughts from appearing? Try this too and tell me how it goes?
These attempts result in short moments of silence, then a thought slips in. Perhaps sooner than I am willing to acknowledge as I'm trying not to hear them, but then it's clear a thought has happened and I've failed. It feels as though I need to mentally remind myself not to think to go more than a couple seconds without a thought, but of course to remind myself is itself a thought. I can't really use thought as a tool in preventing thought of course, so what else would I use. I can't see a thought before it happens so there's no way to stop it, only way to be aware of a thought is to have it, by then it's too late. There's no thought waiting room I can peer into to say "nope, stay, I want quiet where I am so you aren't welcome".

To further experiment I attempted to override thought, and just think "don't think don't think" without letting any other thoughts happen. This too fails as a subtle narrative in the act of not thinking kicks in. In addition to the fact that after a while a thought that I must remember to keep thinking "don't think" also appears. So even trying to override thoughts and only have very specific ones seems just as futile. Thought is willing to entertain the attempt it seems. Yet there's no compliance.

I'm finding the wording amusing talking about thought. In that last sentence I feel as though I could use:

I can't think/thought doesn't think/there is no thought of.

It's hard to say which is most accurate. It all seems so interchangeable.

Hope I made any lick of sense in all that rambling.

Liam.

User avatar
Oneironaut
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2019 4:50 pm

Re: Seeking I guess, always seeking.

Postby Oneironaut » Tue Dec 17, 2019 1:48 pm

I moved a setion to the end of the post from the middle as I thought it would make more sense, ironically it's had the opposite effect.
I'm finding the wording amusing talking about thought. In that last sentence I feel as though I could use:

I can't think/thought doesn't think/there is no thought of.

It's hard to say which is most accurate. It all seems so interchangeable.
The sentence it's referring to is
I can't think of examples where thought is not about something.

User avatar
JonathanR
Posts: 4292
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 10:14 pm

Re: Seeking I guess, always seeking.

Postby JonathanR » Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:18 pm

Hi Liam

It was great to read your posts.

I'm struck by the thoroughness of your looking into these questions. Well done.
. they are frequently asserting ideas about stuff. As if they are always trying to makes sense of things, identify and solve problems. Sometimes I'm running over what I would say to someone in an hypothetical conversation, it's always quite defensive,
This is so true, isn't it? But are they 'your' thoughts?
. I can't think of examples where thought is not about something.
This does seem true of thoughts..
If we look at the direct encounter with seeing or hearing, for example, is it true to say that these senses really seem to just be happening in the moment, without thoughts making them happen?

But the content of thoughts, what thoughts are about... Do thoughts make anything happen? I mean like seeing or hearing? Or do such sensations happen anyway, regardless of what thoughts may 'say'?

Best wishes

Jon

User avatar
Oneironaut
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2019 4:50 pm

Re: Seeking I guess, always seeking.

Postby Oneironaut » Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:46 am

Hi Jon.

I'm doing my best to take my time, I don't see any reason to rush.
but are they 'your' thoughts?
I've found it very difficult to answer this one way or the other. Thoughts regularly have the sound of my voice, a much more articulate and nice sounding version the voice that comes out of my mouth. It's easy to call them me and mine just out of familiarity. There's also a sense of effort alongside them, and I've always attributed effort to be the result of a self asserting it's...self. At least that's how I've always seen it. I don't actually have evidence to back up that idea, and don't even understand it myself.

Perhaps I'm getting off track and confusing myself trying to make sense of such a vague feeling. Using what I've seen so far in examining thoughts here, I see nothing to suggest that the thoughts are mine. I can't predict them, remove or change them. If I really had my way though, and could choose exactly what thoughts I had, I'd be choosing a quiet mind filled with happiness. Yet I seem to have no impact whatsoever. Normally the planning and doing uses thought as a tool to 'do', but as I don't know a thought before it happens then theres no opportunity for me to control them or anything they lead to, there's no room for me to 'get in' the train of thought. Even reactions to thought are themselves more thoughts. This means that any sense of responsibility of the thought has to come after the thought as already come and gone as how could it come before, I have no idea what it would be beforehand. In fact how can there be awareness of anything if it hasn't already happened. Is awarenes of anything at all not just awareness of the very recent past, it takes time to process things. Nothing is known till after the fact. Perhaps what we call the or present is simply just the most recent memory frequently being updated.

Sorry I'm getting off track perhaps, I'm just attempting to figure out where 'control' is. When you ask if thoughts are mine I think of control and whether I 'did' them, but I can't, so they aren't mine. They appear to be independently operating. I've just assumed that there must be an invisible puppet master behind them and that puppet master is me. If 'it/me' is there I don't see it.

Carrying on because I could probably go around in circle like this forever.
Is it true to say that these senses really seem to just be happening in the moment, without thoughts making them happen
Absolutely, thought seems to have no input in what the senses provide, I can't manipulate the colour of something I'm looking at or choose not to hear my neighbours listen to music at 3 am. Thoughts are more like a look but don't touch observer to the senses. They do put a lot of work into developing opinions and reactions to what the senses provide though. They provide without any input from thought or myself. Regardless if I like or dislike what is shown.

I rambled a bit here, I find these lines of enquiry very interesting.

Thanks for reading.

Liam.

User avatar
JonathanR
Posts: 4292
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 10:14 pm

Re: Seeking I guess, always seeking.

Postby JonathanR » Sat Dec 21, 2019 11:01 pm

Hi Liam

Sorry it has taken a couple of days to reply.
I'm doing my best to take my time, I don't see any reason to rush.
Very good . Take whatever time you find necessary.
. I've just assumed that there must be an invisible puppet master behind them and that puppet master is me. If 'it/me' is there I don't see it.
Very interesting. Its great that you are motivated to examine your experience and to look at it closely, as you are doing

But IS there an invisivle Puppetmaster, behind the scenes, pulling strings and making things happen?

Is it possible to prevent thoughts from appearing... including the thought 'I'?

All best

Jon

User avatar
Oneironaut
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2019 4:50 pm

Re: Seeking I guess, always seeking.

Postby Oneironaut » Sat Dec 21, 2019 11:59 pm

Hi Jon
But IS there an invisivle Puppetmaster, behind the scenes, pulling strings and making things happen?
No, there's no one. Thoughts refer to one, but I don't see it. There's nothing to see. The sense of I is convincing regardless.
Is it possible to prevent thoughts from appearing... including the thought 'I'?
No, I don't seem to be able to do so at all.

Thanks, Liam

User avatar
JonathanR
Posts: 4292
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 10:14 pm

Re: Seeking I guess, always seeking.

Postby JonathanR » Sun Dec 22, 2019 6:47 am

Hello Liam

Absolutely, thought seems to have no input in what the senses provide, I can't manipulate the colour of something I'm looking at or choose not to hear my neighbours listen to music at 3 am.
Yes, that does seem to be the case, based on looking at the experience of actual sensations. And its worth exploring each sense, sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch.

Is thought making any of these happen?

Is 'I' or 'me' making any of these happen?

Here is a little exercise...

Take an orange or other fruit.

Place it somewhere and close your eyes.

Spend some moments imagining the orange. Imagine it as fully as possible but keep eyes closed and simply think of the orange, its colour, its smell, texture and so on.

Now, open your eyes and pick up the fruit. Notice the experience now. How does this differ from simply imagining the orange?

Notice the orange colour now. Is there a separate 'you' experiencing the experience of orangeness.

. Is there a viewer, sepatate from the experience of it, that then 'experiences' the colour?

If so, where is that remote viewer?

Thank you

Jon

User avatar
Oneironaut
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2019 4:50 pm

Re: Seeking I guess, always seeking.

Postby Oneironaut » Mon Dec 23, 2019 4:04 pm

Hi Jon.
.Yes, that does seem to be the case, based on looking at the experience of actual sensations. And its worth exploring each sense, sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch

Is thought making any of these happen?

Is 'I' or 'me' making any of these happen?
Every sense does indeed seem to operate independently, neither thought or myself appears to be making anything happen, or have control over it.

There's no sense of self in the senses, but it feels as though there's a "me" who is recieving these senses.
. Spend some moments imagining the orange. Imagine it as fully as possible but keep eyes closed and simply think of the orange, its colour, its smell, texture and so on.

Now, open your eyes and pick up the fruit. Notice the experience now. How does this differ from simply imagining the orange?

Notice the orange colour now. Is there a separate 'you' experiencing the experience of orangeness.
Imagination is surprisingly difficult to describe. Ironic considering it's something I've used so much.
how does differ from simply imagining the orange?
The senses provide everything effortlessly, imagination requires intent. Everything in imagination is not there. Imagined experiences don't actually take place in the sense that's being imagined, when I imagine the shape of the orange, I don't see the shape in my actual vision, and I don't feel the texture of the orange in my actual hands. It's all being held in some "imagination place" that seems separate from all the actual senses. A sort of empty imitation, yet somehow still has some weight, I can enjoy a song in my head despite not hearing a thing.
. Notice the orange colour now. Is there a separate 'you' experiencing the experience of orangeness.
I feel as though I am experiencing the orange. That in order for there to be awareness of the orange, I would have to be that awareness.
Is there a viewer, sepatate from the experience of it, that then 'experiences' the colour?
I feel as though "I" am that viewer.
If so, where is that remote viewer?
I can't look at it/me, perhaps cause it's not there. Though not seeing it doesn't convince me it doesn't exist. I wouldn't expect a viewer to be able to view itself. A mirror reflects everything but itself.

Perhaps I'm missing something, that's all I have for now though.

Thanks

Liam

User avatar
JonathanR
Posts: 4292
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 10:14 pm

Re: Seeking I guess, always seeking.

Postby JonathanR » Tue Dec 24, 2019 12:06 am

Hello Liam
I feel as though I am experiencing the orange. That in order for there to be awareness of the orange, I would have to be that awareness.
Ok. Awareness, yes. But look now at the immediate experience of this. Is it possible to fnd an entity 'doing' awareness?

Is any separation found between orangeness and the experience if it?

What is experiencing orange?

Thank you

Jon

User avatar
Oneironaut
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2019 4:50 pm

Re: Seeking I guess, always seeking.

Postby Oneironaut » Wed Dec 25, 2019 2:32 pm

Hi, Jon, happy holidays. It's been a little busy for me but still managing to find some time to reflect.
. . Awareness, yes. But look now at the immediate experience of this. Is it possible to fnd an entity 'doing' awareness?
No, I don't see anything doing awareness, much like the senses it just is happening always without input.
Is any separation found between orangeness and the experience if it?
No, I see no separation, no gap. It feels like it would make more sense to say the experience of the orangeness and the orangeness itself are one in the same. The idea that they could be separate things doesn't make sense really when I think about it.
What is experiencing orange?
The thought "I am" is still the immediate response here, yet I'm not seeing this receiver anywhere and I can't imagine where it would be if there was. Despite the sense of it being me still there.

Thanks,

Liam

User avatar
JonathanR
Posts: 4292
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 10:14 pm

Re: Seeking I guess, always seeking.

Postby JonathanR » Thu Dec 26, 2019 5:35 pm

Hi Liam,

Thanks. Happy hols to you too.
to say the experience of the orangeness and the orangeness itself are one in the same. The idea that they could be separate things doesn't make sense really when I think about it.
No. I agree. It doesn't . And yet language, or words, would seen to speak of separate things. For example, its often expressed in terms of the idea that there is something called 'perception' , and a 'separate' object that.is 'perceived' as well as one who does the perceiving. A 'perceiver'. But (as with the orange), what if all thats actually happening is what we might call 'orangeness'?

What if language is unwittingly being used to enshrine and reinforce dualities that are just ideas about dualities?
The thought "I am" is still the immediate response here, yet I'm not seeing this receiver anywhere and I can't imagine where it would be if there was. Despite the sense of it being me still there.
This is the sticking point for you. You are clearly able to look and not find a 'self' or 'receiver'. But theres still a persisting idea of a 'me' that is still 'there'.

One question is 'where' then? If a me is 'there', where is that?

Also, is it really a sense of me, as such? In the orange experiment the real orange was really sensed, whilst the idea of an orange remained as an idea.

Could the sense of me be an idea ABOUT a 'me'?

Its common, too, to strain to get to a 'no self' state of some sort and thereby miss the obvious.

All best

Jon

User avatar
JonathanR
Posts: 4292
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 10:14 pm

Re: Seeking I guess, always seeking.

Postby JonathanR » Sun Dec 29, 2019 10:18 pm

Hi Liam

How is it going?

Jon

User avatar
Oneironaut
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2019 4:50 pm

Re: Seeking I guess, always seeking.

Postby Oneironaut » Sun Dec 29, 2019 11:24 pm

Hi Jon

I'm still here, i haven't had time to give this my full attention, and I don't want to just reply repeating myself, but I'm still here and should have some time tomorrow to give my full attention to this.

I do throughout the day regularly look for an 'experiencer' and still feel a sort of certainty this everything is happening to a 'me' regardless of whether I can see this 'me' anywhere. That's all I can say for now and I'll try to give more detect answers to your last reply tomorrow.

Thanks.

User avatar
JonathanR
Posts: 4292
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 10:14 pm

Re: Seeking I guess, always seeking.

Postby JonathanR » Mon Dec 30, 2019 12:23 am

Hi Liam,

That's fine

Given what you've said about feeling that it's a 'me' that experiences, its worth looking to see what this 'me' actually is?

That's to say, where are it's edges?

Does it have edges or boundaries?

Jon


Return to “THE GATE”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests