Thoughts

[NaturaNaturans]

I often ponder about how strange thinking is. This inner monologeu. Why would there be a need to talk to oneself? Are we the thinker, or the observer of thoughts? 
 

i am strugling expressing my self, but i just find it bizarre. Any thoughts?

[Daniel]

1 hour ago, NaturaNaturans said:

Why would there be a need to talk to oneself?

 

I think it has evolutionary advantage.  

 

1 hour ago, NaturaNaturans said:

Any thoughts?

 

It's well known what happens to a child developing in isolation from language.  They do not develop in a healthy manner.  So, turn back the sands of time and imagine what it would be like for a very primitive version of what would eventually evolve into a human mind.  The one which talked to itself would thrive because the mind is further developing itself.

 

There's also the notion that all language is symbolism and pattern recognition.  This also has survival benefit if the symbols and patterns are recognized accurately.  Conversely, this inner dialogue can cause all sort of neurotic behavior.  This is what has produced the trend to silence the inner dialogue.  You can probably predict what I prefer ( do both ).

 

Edited November 28, 2023 by Daniel

[stirling]

4 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said:

Are we the thinker, or the observer of thoughts? 

 

If you can observe your thoughts you obviously aren't your thoughts. Even so, many discover that they also are not the observer of thoughts.

[NaturaNaturans]

8 hours ago, stirling said:

 

If you can observe your thoughts you obviously aren't your thoughts. Even so, many discover that they also are not the observer of thoughts.

What are they, then?

[Maddie]

4 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said:

What are they, then?

 

Just thoughts 😌

[Daniel]

Just denial.

[Mark Foote]

12 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said:

 

Quote

If you can observe your thoughts you obviously aren't your thoughts. Even so, many discover that they also are not the observer of thoughts.

(stirling)
 

What are they, then?
 

If I'm parsing stirling correctly, he's pointing to the lack of an abiding self in thought, and even in the consciousness that is aware of thought.
 

 

[Mark Foote]

On 11/27/2023 at 4:43 PM, NaturaNaturans said:

I often ponder about how strange thinking is. This inner monologeu. Why would there be a need to talk to oneself? Are we the thinker, or the observer of thoughts? 
 

i am strugling expressing my self, but i just find it bizarre. Any thoughts?
 

 

Gautama's way of living included thought initiated and sustained with regard to the mind:
 

Aware of mind I shall breathe in. Aware of mind I shall breathe out.
 

(One) makes up one’s mind:
 

“Gladdening my mind I shall breathe in. Gladdening my mind I shall breathe out.
 

Composing my mind I shall breathe in. Composing my mind I shall breathe out.
 

Detaching my mind I shall breathe in. Detaching my mind I shall breathe out.
 

(SN V 312, Pali Text Society Vol V p 275-276; tr. F. L. Woodward; masculine pronouns replaced, re-paragraphed)

S' little trick there--thought initiated and sustained with regard to gladdening the mind and composing the mind permits detachment from the mind.

In my experience, the mindfulness that made up Gautama's way of living hinges on cessation experienced in inhalation and exhalation, that is to say, the relinquishment of action of the body in favor of action out of the sense of place associated with free occurrence of awareness--"one-pointedness":  
 

Herein… the (noble) disciple, making self-surrender the object of (their) thought, lays hold of concentration, lays hold of one-pointedness.  (The disciple), aloof from sensuality, aloof from evil conditions, enters on the first trance, which is accompanied by thought directed and sustained, which is born of solitude, easeful and zestful, and abides therein.
 

(SN v 198, Pali Text Society vol V p 174; parenthetical material paraphrases original; “directed” also rendered as “initial” MN III p 78 and as “applied” PTS AN III p 18-19; emphasis added)

 

 

 

 

[stirling]

On 11/28/2023 at 4:57 AM, NaturaNaturans said:

What are they, then?

 

In Buddhism there are 6 "sense doors". They are comprised of the 5 conventional senses and one more, the thinking "mind". The thinking "mind" takes the input from the other sense and constructs what we take for reality out of it all. However, if we learn to look from an unbiased position we can learn to say that our exaltation of this storyteller is misguided. 

 

When observed from the still, quiet mind in meditation thoughts are just like any other phenomena. They arise where they are in consciousness and pass into nothingness. They have no exalted or special place. They are not who or what "you" are, they are not other, and beyond what they might imply about this moment they have no particular meaning other that what WE (thinking mind) attribute to them. 

 

What is important is to see this for oneself. It isn't hard. It can be accomplished in as little as a week of meditation practice, with some guidance. 

 

-

 

If your question was more along the lines of "who is the observer?", that takes a little more work to see. A simple if somewhat unsatisfying answer is that the observer is not separate from the observed.

[stirling]

14 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

Gautama's way of living included thought initiated and sustained with regard to the mind:
 

Aware of mind I shall breathe in. Aware of mind I shall breathe out.
 

(One) makes up one’s mind:
 

“Gladdening my mind I shall breathe in. Gladdening my mind I shall breathe out.
 

Composing my mind I shall breathe in. Composing my mind I shall breathe out.
 

Detaching my mind I shall breathe in. Detaching my mind I shall breathe out.
 

(SN V 312, Pali Text Society Vol V p 275-276; tr. F. L. Woodward; masculine pronouns replaced, re-paragraphed)

S' little trick there--thought initiated and sustained with regard to gladdening the mind and composing the mind permits detachment from the mind.

In my experience, the mindfulness that made up Gautama's way of living hinges on cessation experienced in inhalation and exhalation, that is to say, the relinquishment of action of the body in favor of action out of the sense of place associated with free occurrence of awareness--"one-pointedness":  
 

Herein… the (noble) disciple, making self-surrender the object of (their) thought, lays hold of concentration, lays hold of one-pointedness.  (The disciple), aloof from sensuality, aloof from evil conditions, enters on the first trance, which is accompanied by thought directed and sustained, which is born of solitude, easeful and zestful, and abides therein.
 

(SN v 198, Pali Text Society vol V p 174; parenthetical material paraphrases original; “directed” also rendered as “initial” MN III p 78 and as “applied” PTS AN III p 18-19; emphasis added)

 

How does this lay bare the thinker, observer, or source of thoughts? 

[NaturaNaturans]

On 28.11.2023 at 2:47 AM, Daniel said:

I think it has evolutionary advantage.  

But Daniel, how can i tell myself something i dont allready know?

[Daniel]

2 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said:

But Daniel, how can i tell myself something i dont allready know?

 

Inference or deduction confirmed by experimentation.

[Daniel]

[Daniel]

 

3 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said:

But Daniel, how can i tell myself something i dont allready know?

 

It's called creativity.  It's a cognitive function.

 

Here's a study I was referring to in the other thread on non-duality.

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877050914004992

 

[Unota]

Ahaha, this is really interesting to think about from my perspective, considering I have not historically had an 'inner monologue,' and only on occasion still, even after constantly working on it. It seems this isn't a unique experience, considering a broader portion of the population seems to 'think' in a similar manner than previously thought, (more in emotions, images, or what I would personally call more like constant 'static noise' than coherent thought.) In sacrifice of calling myself 'stupid,' I think that an inner monologue is crucial to exercising the mind and maintain a clarity that I'm constantly struggling to have. I think that...there is a need to think to oneself, because it reflects concentration and focus, awareness, and provides an ability to assess yourself and your surroundings by putting things into something more coherent. I have always had difficulty with decisions, because I find it difficult to weigh them in my mind without being able to properly voice them. I have little perception of myself because I have never really considered in my head things that are important to me. Life is very chaotic this way.

[Mark Foote]

4 hours ago, stirling said:

 

How does this lay bare the thinker, observer, or source of thoughts? 
 

 

 

What thinker, observer, or source of thoughts?  Sounds like you're pointing to something other than the mind as a sense, the object of the mind (as a sense), contact between the mind and an object of mind, impact based on contact, and feeling based on impact?  Something other than equanimity with respect to the pleasant, painful, or neither-pleasant-nor-painful  of feeling born of contact, something other than knowing things as they really are?

I don't get it--what are you talking about!

The last part of Gautama's way of living ("the intent concentration on inbreathing and outbreathing") was mindfulness of the state of mind in four elements.  All the thoughts initiated and sustained in the mindfulness that made up his way of living were initiated and sustained with "one-pointedness" present:
 

(One) makes up one’s mind:
 

Contemplating impermanence I shall breathe in. Contemplating impermanence I shall breathe out.
 

Contemplating dispassion I shall breathe in. Contemplating dispassion I shall breathe out.
 

Contemplating cessation I shall breathe in. Contemplating cessation I shall breathe out.
 

Contemplating renunciation I shall breathe in. Contemplating renunciation I shall breathe out.
 

(SN V 312, Pali Text Society Vol V pg 275-276; tr. F. L. Woodward; masculine pronouns replaced, re-paragraphed)
 

 

I know, stirling, that Suzuki's take is more to your liking:

 

… there is no need to depend on teaching. But the most important thing is to practice and realize our true nature… [laughs]. This is, you know, Zen.
 

(Shunryu Suzuki, Tassajara 68-07-24 transcript from shunryusuzuki.com)

 

 

My version:

 

When a presence of mind is retained as the placement of attention shifts, then the natural tendency toward the free placement of attention can draw out thought initial and sustained, and bring on the stages of concentration:

 

The "natural tendency toward the free placement of attention", would you agree? 

"Presence of mind retained as the placement of attention shifts" is "one-pointedness", in my experience.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 29, 2023 by Mark Foote

[Cobie]

.

Edited December 23, 2023 by Cobie

[stirling]

18 minutes ago, Mark Foote said:

What thinker, observer, or source of thoughts?

 

Mark,

 

NaturaNaturans asks:

 

Quote

Are we the thinker, or the observer of thoughts? 

 

Your answer didn't seem to cover that from what I could tell. 

 

20 minutes ago, Mark Foote said:

I know, stirling, that Suzuki's take is more to your liking:

 

… there is no need to depend on teaching. But the most important thing is to practice and realize our true nature… [laughs]. This is, you know, Zen.
 

(Shunryu Suzuki, Tassajara 68-07-24 transcript from shunryusuzuki.com)

 

Well... yeah. 

 

It's a very different type of instruction than what the Buddha would give in the tripitaka. It is an instruction to rest in "emptiness" without any techniques or mental manipulation.  

 

Emptiness as a concept that doesn't really appear in the early works of Buddhism EXCEPT in the limited form of "no-self" and in the full implications of "dependent origination". Only the Bahiya sutta suggests the wholeness of what it might mean. To realize "no-self" is an important moment, but to realize "emptiness" is a whole other kettle of fish. 

 

[Unota]

15 minutes ago, Cobie said:

 

A natural born Buddha? Isn’t that what Buddhist meditation tries to achieve?
 

 

Hahaha! I don't think so...Just because I don't have an inner monologue doesn't mean I'm not anxious or troubled all the time, I just have difficulty processing, voicing, and understanding my feelings without doing it through writing or voicing it out loud. I don't know a lot about Buddhism, but I suspect there's probably more to it than this.

Edited November 29, 2023 by Unota

[Mark Foote]

11 minutes ago, stirling said:

 

 

Well... yeah. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 29, 2023 by Mark Foote