Monthly Archives: October 2020

How do I ignore thoughts?

Posted on by

Q: Is the rule of this inquiry to ignore thoughts?

A: No, it’s not about rules. Thoughts are not disregarded by rules.

Q: OK, because rules are just more thoughts, right?

A: Rules are based on beliefs. But we do not exclude thoughts based on beliefs. Rather we are investigating the validity of thoughts, if what thoughts are saying are actually in line with experience.

Q: But in order to see Truth, I must disregard thoughts or disidentify with them.

A: Can you see that there is still a belief that there is someone here who must disregard thoughts or disidentify with them?

So what is it? What is it that is currently identified with thoughts?
What is it that is standing apart from thought and has the ability to disregard them?
What do thoughts happen to?
Is there someone outside of thoughts, being identified with them?
Where is the mysterious, unknown, outside entity?

Q: I don’t see anything. But we spend our whole lives trying to make sense or understand ourselves and the world around us.

A:  Please look at what you are saying and notice the beliefs and assumptions there.

There is a belief in separate selves, selves that are separate from the whole / life / existence, and each fragmented and isolated selves are living their lives in a world, which these assumed selves (like bubbles) are separate from.

But in reality, there is only existence, whatever is happening right now.
There are no parts, no fragments.
Existence is not like a jigsaw puzzle with millions of billions of pieces.
There are no pieces at all, there is only existence / life / what IS, which is whole.

Q: But in order to see this, I have to ignore thoughts, haven’t I?

A: It’s not simply about ignoring thoughts, but rather to SEE thoughts for what they are. Just fantasies, just figments of imagination, without any roots in reality.

Just notice what is ‘underneath’ all thoughts.
Thoughts add an overlaying narrative of names, labels, interpretations, explanations over the simplicity of what is.
Instead of endlessly reaching for ideas, concepts and explanations, just let it all go, and see.
Just see what is here now silently, without words.
Just notice what is left when you stop thinking about it.

In order to ignore thoughts, there has to be someone outside of thoughts, who has volition and the ability to ignore them.

So ‘ignoring thoughts’ are about dualism and separation and a belief in an agency with free will.

Thoughts are always out of step with reality, and they obstructs the clear seeing of how things actually are.
Reality is very simple.

Once you can see this, you will stop endlessly frustrating yourself by trying to figure out how things are.
Just look, what is it that is separate from what is, and trying to figure out how things are?
Is there a self or me here, who is separate and isolated from what is, from reality, and thus is in need to understand reality?

Truth or reality is not an idea or a belief.
It cannot be grasped by thoughts.
It does not need to be understood by the intellect.
Actually, it is impossible to understand through thoughts.
It is inconceivable, ungraspable.
And yet, it can be directly seen.

Seeing is wordless, and immediate.
The taste of chocolate is immediately and silently (wordlessly) known, since it is not conceptual.
As soon as the label ‘taste of chocolate’ is added, the immediacy of experience is veiled by conceptualization.
Any form of description is an abstraction, which is added after the immediate experience.

Q: OK, I get it. But how do I wake up from this conceptualization? And how do I stay awake?

A: Do you believe that there is an I that can wake up or be awake?
What is it that could be awake?
What is it that awakening could happen TO?
Is there someone separate form life, waiting to wake up to reality?
Is there someone who needs to let go of conceptualization?
Or letting go happens on its own effortlessly, when the futility of trying to grasp what is with thoughts is recognized?

Thoughts are never the real deal.

How to be present?

Posted on by

Q: How can I be more present? I really try to be present, but sooner or later I realize that I’ve been somewhere else in my thoughts. So what could I do? Do you have some techniques to learn how to stay present?

What is it here-now that is separate from this moment and can move in and out of the now?

Is there an ‘I’, an entity moving in and out of this moment?
Who is sometimes here, but some other times, leaves the present moment and goes to some other place and time?
Where would that be?
What other time?

Is there any other time and place than here now?

Stop reading for a moment, and do everything you can to leave the now. Just for a split of a second, go to the past.
Can you do that? No? Try harder…

Do you still believe that you have to learn how to stay present?

When you believe that you are not present, where do you go? Where are you then?
How could you leave this very moment? Can you see that this is utterly impossible?

If you can, then why do you want to stay present?
Aren’t you always here now?

Do you believe that when there are thoughts about the past and the future then you leave this moment and travel through time and space on the train of thoughts?

What is this ‘I’ that is so powerful that can leave this moment? A time traveller?
Isn’t this ‘I’ just the figment of imagination?

Just notice, isn’t the thought of a past happening now?
Isn’t the future a presently appearing thought, now?

Can you grasp the total impossibility of not being present?

Just let it sink in.
It is not possible to be anywhere else than here now.
Impossible.
No matter what the present story is about, this moment is all there is.

Or is there anything else than this present moment?
Is there any other time and place than this here now?

Just notice that tomorrow has no reality outside of the story about tomorrow, which is always appears now.
Tomorrow happens now, since all there is to tomorrow is the story of tomorrow.
Yesterday happens now, since all there is to yesterday is the presently appearing story about yesterday.

It is impossible not to be here in this moment.
Since this moment is all there is.
There is nothing outside of this moment.
There is no other time or space than this.
Literally. Just this.

But even saying that it is impossible not be here in this moment, is a stretch.
Why? Well… is there anything separate form this moment which could be in this moment?

Does this present experience have parts?
A ‘me’ which occupies a small space in a big universe?
Or this ‘separate me’ is just another story as this moment presently appears?

Are you something that is separate from what is?

Just notice that you are always here.
You cannot not be here.
And there is nothing separate from what is here.
Here is all there is.

So what is it that you believe yourself to be in the moment when you think that you need to learn to be present?

Noticing that there is no separate self can only ever happen right here now

Posted on by

Q: I saw it in the past that there is no separate self, so why should I look more? I already know that there is none.

OK, so you are referencing back to a memory of a previous looking.

But realization does not exist in the past.
Only here now.

So in essence, it doesn’t really matter what has been seen yesterday, an hour ago, or even a minute ago.

The only thing that matters what is SEEN or NOTICED in this very moment.

Now… and now…. and now…

So the question is: can you see it now that there is no separate self governing life?
Can you see it now? And what about this moment? Is it clear now? And this moment? What about now?

Or is it now just a memory you hold onto?

If I cannot see something in this very moment, then I cannot see it. Then it is just a belief in this very moment, since I rely on a memory, it is not something that I experientially recognize now.

Therefore, looking always has to be afresh. You can never rely on a memory.

What is a memory anyway? Isn’t it just a thought that is appearing now?
So when you rely on the memory of a previous seeing, then is it a present experience, or it is just a thought story in this moment?

Can noticing of what IS happen any other time than now?

Why would you go to dead thoughts, while this moment is presently alive, here now?

Why not notice what is here now?
What do you need those memories for?
To perpetuate the notion that there is someone who saw in the past?
Someone who is searching, and can get awakened sometime in the future?

To keep the notion of an enduring entity who is living through time and space?
Where is this entity, now?

Can you notice here now that this is just a story about a character who is set on a journey towards awakening?

The story is here as the present thought, but where is the character?
Is the character also here?
Or is it just a baseless assumption?

Notice what is here now.
There is nowhere else to go or be.
Just this.

All words are symbols

Posted on by

…

…

…

All words are symbols.
All symbols are conceptual.
They are not reality.


Reality is what actually is, regardless of the absence or the presence of any symbol or word.

Reality is what still exists after we stopped thinking about it.

Like the word ‘apple’ is just a symbolic representation of something that is real.
But is the word ‘apple’ the real thing itself?

So there is the real deal, the real thing that can be experience by seeing it, touching it, tasting it and smelling it. And we can label this experiencable thing as ‘apple’, ‘fruit’ or ‘food’.

But even if we use different labels, those labels point to the same thing.
In this case, all the three words points to the same experience of colors, shapes, smells, tastes, textures, what we collectively call as an apple.

If I am eating an apple, but I stop thinking about it, the apple (the experience which the word points too) won’t disappear.
The actual thing  (experience) remains even in the absence of labels.

Similarly, we can investigate if the words of ‘Vivien’, ‘body’, ‘consciousness’, ‘me’, ‘entity’ are pointing to a same thing, or not.

We can also look into if these words are actually pointing to something real, something experiencable, or there is no actual experience, actual reality behind those words (or some of these words).

Like the word ‘economy’ doesn’t point to anything real.
It’s purely just a concept, which can ever be defined by other concepts, but it never becomes an experience.
So it’s just a man-made idea, just an artificial concept, and not a reality.
The word ‘economy’ doesn’t point to anything real, just to other ideas, just to more thoughts.

We have words for things that can be experienced through the five senses.
Like the thought label ‘apple’ that is a name for an actual object or thing.

And we have words that give a name or label to something that cannot be experienced through the five senses.
These ‘things’ can only be thought of, but never experienced, since they do not actually exist. They just imagined.
Like the thoughts of Santa, weather, or economy.

That is the difference between experience and fiction.

So what about the word ‘I’ then?
What is ‘I’ a name for?

Seeking for answers

Posted on by

Q: I have lots of questions, and a strong need for answers.


But who is asking? Who is in need for answers?
Haven’t you read and heard lots of answers already?
Do you think that your questions could ever be satisfied by the right answers?

What do you need your answers for?
For a sense of safety?
What needs to be safe, and from what?
Does life need to protect itself from life?

Do you think that if there were answers to found, you wouldn’t have found them by now?
Can you see that all these questions and seeking for answers have only one purpose, the keep the assumptions of a seeker in place?
A fictional person who has questions and is  in need of answers?

The questioner arises with the questions.
If there would be no answers, not just the questions would stop, but the one who is asking the questions.
The questioner arises and dissolves with the questioner.
The end of seeking for answers is the end of the questioner.
It is the realization that there is no-one at the core asking questions.

So what are you waiting for?
For the right answer? What for? To keep the illusion of a seeker going?
To keep the illusion that you are separate from life?
And one day when you find the right answer, then, and only then, you will be free and at home?

Why ‘one day’? Why not now?
If not now, when?

For how much longer will you seek, instead of stop and actually find what is already here, now?

What happens if you stop seeking for answers, just for a moment?
Can you see that stopping seeking is finding?
Can you see that anything you could ever find is already, presently here-now?

But here-and-now is the last place the questioner wants to look.
Since here-and-now, both the questioner and the questions collapse.
Here-and-now is all there is, as it is.