Without thought there can not be a thinker.
So how does thought begin?
Is there a choice,to be or not to be.

<pre>One of the aspects of the beginning of the thought process is the mechanistic responce to the sensory perceptions,the past responding to the prescent. This mechanistic responce is not percieved with the perception,hence is avoidable.
</pre>

Another source of the thought process seems to be thoughts ability to retain suffient energy for it to emerge again into consciousnees when the level of stimulation being experienced in the consciousness is less than the retained energy within the thought.Hence the same thoughts keep emerging over and over again.Talk about a self being boring.If a direction of thought is ignored for a time then its residule energy declines and it is unable to emerge.Other wise all the thoughts that we ever had would be continually emerging.
What then is needed to avoid the mechanistic responces, and the energising of the residual thoughts?
O.K. Attention is what is needed.Attention to the space that follows the effortless action that ends thought.The choiceless awareness before the choice to be is made.
To be or not to be,its up to me.There is a choice to think,which is to be,or not to think,which is not to be.
Why then do i think all the time,or is this just another illussion of the thought process. It is more a case of i think that i think all the time because i can not be aware when i am not thinking.

This post was last updated by John T Sat, 01 Aug 2009.

John T wrote:
What then is needed to avoid the mechanistic responces, and the energising of the residual thoughts?

Who will avoid the mechanistic response.. or tame the residual energy? Isn't that the self trying to be in control by not permitting thought? And, ridiculously, it has no other means of control but another thought.. thought of avoiding thought!

It is when thought being aware of its limitation... cesases to chase the whole!!

I Am Not This!

Sir,

<pre> The question was not who but what. You are assuming that i am inferrring that the ending of thought is an activity of further thought,which obviously it can not be.There is however an effortless action that does end thought.
Why do you assume that i am referring to further thought trying to end thought,is it your conditioning perhaps?
</pre>

Manoj SachDeva wrote:
It is when thought being aware of its limitation... cesases to chase the whole!!

....effortless action... is perception..

No inferences, sir!

I Am Not This!