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.